On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 01:30:25AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 10:21:18AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > >> We could have met those expectations of the d-i and kernel teams had > >> taken the issue seriously before now. Their failure to do so does not > >> translate to an emergency on my or Debian's part.
> > The failure to do this is no more the responsibility of the d-i or > > kernel teams than it is yours or mine. They are volunteers, just as you > > or I are, and they have no more responsibility to work on anything they > > choose not to do so, than you are personally responsible for ensuring > > Debian meets its commitment of providing a non-free area in its archive > > and supporting users who need the software there. > So does this work for me too? Can I go and stash non-free stuff in my > packages, and if others complain, simply raise a stink and insist that > nobody has the right to order me to remove it? Feel free, but unlike the installer and the kernel, which are both release-critical components in and of themselves, your package is likely to be removed from the release altogether if you do this. There's also something of a difference, IMHO, between dropping sourceless firmware from the kernel with the result that some users will be unable to install etch at all, and requiring that you not add arbitrary other non-free stuff to your packages that should be in non-free. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
