On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 05:27:18PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 04:57:46PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > > It may not be a concern for *you*. Yet it might be a concern for the > > whole project, if you take a bit wider look at it. > > Sure. If you are concerned by other packages that don't run on an arch > you care about, your are free to provide the work needed to fix it.
No thanks, I don't feel like fixing non-free. > But using this as an example to remove _every_ package from non-free, > and the whole of non-free is stupid. It's just one argument. Of course, removing non-free just because of that is stupid, but we're trying to bring up arguments for discussion, remember? > What about the packages who are arch: all and those who are well > maintained ? You may not be the one using those, but others certainly > do, and the maintainer certainly cares about their package enough to > have them well maintained. We all hope they will continue to maintain them well, on nonfree.org. Michael
