Chris Knadle <chris.kna...@coredump.us> writes: > On Saturday, March 17, 2012 21:53:18, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Hence the Debian patent policy. >> We can't just ignore things like this, nor is it responsible use of >> project resources to openly flaunt disobedience to laws, however >> ill-conceived. But neither is it Debian policy to seek out trouble >> when that trouble isn't forthcoming. >> If you do want to be part of an organization that openly disobeys >> stupid laws and makes a point of civil disobedience, more power to you. >> I personally will be cheering you on. But the Debian Project is not >> that organization, nor is it structured to be that organization (and >> carefully structuring such an organization is important). The Debian >> Project has other goals, which mostly require that it work within the >> legal framework that it has available while making public statements >> when that legal framework interferes with project goals. > The above explains the whole reason d-m.o exists. > However perhaps it also might explain the tenuous relationship d.o has > with d-m.o because d.o may need to distance itself from the work d-m.o > does. Yup. Exactly. Christian is taking on himself the legal risk of providing those packages, which the project as a whole can't really do. Discussion about the confusion that can be caused by some of the other packages he carries aside (and I do think that issue is real), I for one thank him for his work. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fwd6jwtt....@windlord.stanford.edu