On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:10:21AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > I see only one vital point for having those packages on the "real Debian > infrastructure", instead of a mere copy of it: You could continue to > reassign bugs from non-free to main. > > Anything else I missed?
The "real Debian infrastructure" has relatively easy to understand issues (dependencies, conflicts, structure, security, contacts). A "mere copy of it" doesn't currently exist, so will be harder to understand. For example, I would be a bit more worried about trojans in the context of some of the flakier apt-get.org feeds than in the context of something provided by a debian developer (or even a university project). Remember that we're providing binary packages, not source, and binary packages are harder to read than source. -- Raul
