Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes: > >> While I'm happy to talk about whether non-free should be kept or not, >> I'm not interested in having a debate focussed on whether I'm personally >> wrong or right. > > Except that part of the problem is your personal decision to rescind > the current compromise in the social contract. You said not too long > ago on this very list that it's silly and pedantic to insist that > non-free is not part of Debian. Since that's the other half of the > compromise, you seem to think it's over.
Anthony also said that it's more important to have documentation in Debian for important programs, under whatever license, than that the documenation be DFSG-free. I suppose this is consistent with his curious views about non-free being part of Debian. Yet he claimed to support the Social Contract.... at least I think he did. -- Nathanael Nerode <neroden at gcc.gnu.org> US citizens: if you're considering voting for Bush, look at these first: http://www.misleader.org/ http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/ http://www.house.gov/reform/min/politicsandscience/
