Eduard Bloch wrote:
I would like to know your opinion about the discrimination of the
contrib and non-free parts of the Debian archive(*).
There are two parts to this; one is that contrib and non-free are poorly
supported, because a lot of Debian folks are free software guys who just
aren't inter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Out of curiosity, which "important pieces of software" are hidden
>by not mentioning or including non-free (and contrib)?
I will add to the list ipw2100-source, ipw2200-source and many other
drivers which have been declared unworthy of main after the firmware
madness.
--
Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Angus Lees:
> > Erm, no. Many "metric compatible" fonts aren't exactly that way.
> > See http://www.pragma-ade.com/general/technotes/tfmetrics.pdf for an
> > interesting comparison of Palatino.
>
> With well-written documents, the worst problem probably is that
Hi,
Angus Lees:
> Erm, no. Many "metric compatible" fonts aren't exactly that way.
> See http://www.pragma-ade.com/general/technotes/tfmetrics.pdf for an
> interesting comparison of Palatino.
With well-written documents, the worst problem probably is that you get
a font that's a bit wider and ov
At Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:17:26 +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> > Replacement fonts are a standard feature, and using is usually breaks
> > formatting of the document.
> This may be a nitpick, but documents which *break*, instead of just
> looking somewhat sub-optimal, are
* Jonathan Walther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050313 21:35]:
> If it is non-free, then it doesn't belong in Debian. We never should
> have created a non-free section in the first place. If some outside,
> third party were to mirror the non-free section and maintain it as a
> separate distribution, usab
Hi, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Replacement fonts are a standard feature, and using is usually breaks
> formatting of the document.
This may be a nitpick, but documents which *break*, instead of just
looking somewhat sub-optimal, are mostly designed (I'm using that word
loosely) by people who still th
If it is non-free, then it doesn't belong in Debian. We never should
have created a non-free section in the first place. If some outside,
third party were to mirror the non-free section and maintain it as a
separate distribution, usable with apt-get, that would be best.
Although Debian is committ
Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> On ?? 13 ?? 2005 18:28, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> > What's the compatible replacement for Times New Roman?
>
> Compatible in what way? Do you need just a serif font? Or do you need
> some serif font that looks exactly like Times New Roman, sam
On ÎÏÏ 13 ÎÎÏÏÎÎÏ 2005 18:28, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> What's the compatible replacement for Times New Roman?
Compatible in what way? Do you need just a serif font? Or do you need
some serif font that looks exactly like Times New Roman, same
kerning, dimensions, etc but is not TImes New Roman?
Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> On ?? 13 ?? 2005 15:53, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> > - eclipse
> > - msttcorefonts
>
> I can't speak about the rest of this list, but kaffe is now able to
> run eclipse 3.0.1, which means that eclipse will sooner or later
> enter main.
On ÎÏÏ 13 ÎÎÏÏÎÎÏ 2005 15:53, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> - eclipse
> - msttcorefonts
I can't speak about the rest of this list, but kaffe is now able to
run eclipse 3.0.1, which means that eclipse will sooner or later
enter main.
As for msttcorefonts, do we really need it? There are quit
#include
* Steinar H. Gunderson [Sun, Mar 13 2005, 02:53:38PM]:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 02:42:05PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Out of curiosity, which "important pieces of software" are hidden
> > by not mentioning or including non-free (and contrib)?
> - nvidia-glx
> - atmel-firmware
> -
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 02:42:05PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Out of curiosity, which "important pieces of software" are hidden
> by not mentioning or including non-free (and contrib)?
Just a quick list of what some people might consider important or useful,
yet is in contrib or non-free:
- n
Eduard Bloch wrote:
> I would like to know your opinion about the discrimination of the
> contrib and non-free parts of the Debian archive(*).
>
> Do you think that hidding important pieces of software does serve our
> users? (with or without the bug license teaching messages)
Out of curiosity, w
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to know your opinion about the discrimination of the
> contrib and non-free parts of the Debian archive(*).
Debian's a free software project. It's unsurprising that we discriminate
against non-free software.
> Do you think that hidding impor
Hello,
I would like to know your opinion about the discrimination of the
contrib and non-free parts of the Debian archive(*).
Do you think that hidding important pieces of software does serve our
users? (with or without the bug license teaching messages)
The best example for the current practice
17 matches
Mail list logo
