On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 04:18:31PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > I hear from you and from Sven the argument that because this GR > doesn't fix everything, it's pointless. That doesn't seem right. It > fixes *something*; it doesn't fix *everything*, but it makes a start.
I'm saying that the rationale -- where this GR only scratches the surface of the changes which would need to be done to satisfy the rationale -- would lead us into bigger problems. > I haven't heard much from the "other side" yet to tell me what you > think would fix those problems. I'd start with a better rationale. > I haven't heard how keeping non-free on the Debian servers helps in > the development of more free software. You mean like documentation needed for development? Why do I need to explain why such documentation helps the development of more free software? > I haven't heard how you plan to clarify what is and is not Debian. I > haven't heard your proposals for how to communicate to users that > non-free is not part of the Debian distribution. You haven't? I guess you're saying I've not posted enough on this subject? Or, if that's not your point, what is? > So yeah, the GR does not fix everything. So what? It fixes > something, it makes a start, and it's wrong to argue that we should > never start because we aren't sure that the start will fix > everything. Do you have a plan to fix everything? If you have a problem seeing through a dirty window, you can fix it with a hammer. However, even though that's an elegantly simple solution, it's not always a good idea. My plan for "fixing everything" runs something like: first examine the problem, then come up with a solution which makes sense. [And, no, of course that won't solve everything all at once -- which is what I think you were trying to lead me into talking about.] Thanks, -- Raul
