On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 11:36:09AM -0300, Guilherme de S. Pastore wrote:
[...]
> But anyway, the problem here is another one. I myself am totally
> against non-free software, and am really sorry for Debian still
> distributing this kind of thing, and having it on its servers.
I personally have to say, that I'm okay with non-free
existing. Some software is "free enough" for some people,
but not free enough for the DFSG.
No, I don't want a discussion on non-free or not. I don't
have the time for it, and I'm not fully informed on it
either. I just wanted to say, that the current Debian QEMU
Team has diverse opinions on _this_ particular point.
> Apparently, the other members of the Debian QEMU Team think just
> the same. Consequently, it's not a matter of not being able to
> put kqemu on non-free: it's us who don't have any interest in
> maintaining non-free software in Debian.
Basicly, that's the point.
I'm not going to put my free time into non-free software.
Not to mention, that qemu as is makes enough trouble to the
debian qemu team.
> That means if any person is willing and is able to maintain kqemu in
> non-free, they're free to do it.
Right.
Interested parties can try to file a RFP (Request For
Package or so) bug on the wnpp pseudo package.
Check www.debian.org for "work needing and prospective
packages". I don't have an URL handy.
> I was even going to write I would be
> against its inclusion in the team repositories, when I remembered we
> use Alioth structure, which doesn't allow hosting of non-free stuff.
> =)
A downloader/installer framework as such could be free.
But I'd highly recommend hosting it in a distinct space,
read: Not on the normal debian qemu space.
> In the hope of having been clear enough,
I think yes.
Elrond
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
