On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 11:57:47PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Ah. If all this GR is a trial baloon to see the level of > support the non-free packages have, ok. If you want to actually > remove non-free from debian machines, and you wish the GR to actually > pass, then well, it would well behoove you to woo people on the > fence. > > Yes, there is no need for you to heed my advice.
I think it would be useful to poll the developers on the subject. I personally am willing to concede that a few more people might vote in favor of removing non-free if a PDF hundreds of pages in length were prepared cataloging every piece of software in it, and putting forth a more comprehensive transition plan than any this Project has ever seen before. It challenges my credulity that dropping non-free would be anywhere close to as painful from a technical and infrastructural perspective as the transition from libc5 to libc6. It is intriguing to me that some folks whom I have seen vigorously espousing ad-hoc problem solving suddenly become advocates of a highly bureaucratized approach when it comes to dropping non-free. From my perspective, bureaucracy (i.e., documented procedures, clearly delineated powers) is justified by abuse of power (actual or potential). I don't understand how a GR, itself a democratic process, to remove non-free could be an abuse of power. And I *definitely* don't see how a non-binding survey could be such. Perhaps someone could explain it to me? -- G. Branden Robinson | It may be difficult to to determine Debian GNU/Linux | where religious beliefs end and [EMAIL PROTECTED] | mental illness begins. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Elaine Cassel
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
