Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Did you ever consider contacting upstream before doing such >> denouncement? Don't they have something to say? Why do you think you >> cannot find a solution with them? > > I wonder at this vehemence. Isn't the FSF on "our side"? Do you believe
Debian is not the FSF. We host non-free software on our machines, that makes us different enough. > that the FSF is a Gestapo that will clap the mldonkey maintainer in > irons? Since the mldonkey project is using Savannah resources, I think As a Debian Developer, I do care for Debian resources. But anyway, this is a spurious justification. Do we care for SF resources although tons of free software are hosted there? > it's quite reasonable that a DD asks for the FSF's help in persuading > upstream to change their license -- as part of the process of finding a > solution. I've never seen anyone from this thread discussing the current issue on the mldonkey-users list! How dare you tell me someone here tried to persuad them to change the situation? I was the only one to raise the issue, I was the only one to contact them personaly! Did you know that they are going to put the edonkey code elsewhere, and this has been discussed far before the current noise here? > RMS's response seems to be in line with this view. I'm sorry I got no response message from RMS. > >>> You are right that it is not *Debian's* business to worry about non-free >>> software on the FSF's servers. But Debian != Bas, and Bas's business is >>> his own. > >> You got it! It has nothing to do in a bug report log from our BTS: > >> Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 23:17:21 +0200 >> From: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: Bas Zoetekouw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Robert could have done it on his own without CC'ing the BTS. > > True. But it would be disingenuous to suggest that someone packaging > this for Debian would not have an interest in the outcome of the FSF's > discussions with upstream. If our priorities are our users and Free Ya got it one more time! One the Debian side, it doesn't change anything. Why? Because mldonkey will go to non-free anyway, because users want to access edonkey no mather mldonkey is in non-free. So, Debian doesn't get anything with this exclusion! Savannah will be removed this small piece of bytecode and that's it. It is ridiculous. -- Jérôme Marant http://marant.org
