Hello, I don't know if you are aware of that, but a discussion has been raging on debian-vote about the removal of non-free from our archive, our BTS, and so on.
I have been involved in it (even proposed a GR ammendment, altough it was a bit 'bancal'), and also since i am involved with non-free as DD (i maintain the unicorn ADSL modem drivers) and as user (i need lha, but also also because of ocaml-doc and ocaml-books). Since the debian-ocaml team is involved with 3 packages in non-free, i would like to hear about your/our position on this issue (well, and eventually second the anti-non-free removal if you feel like this). I have also sent a small mention about this to the caml team this morning, in marge of an email concerning the bug report : http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=227159 About a QPLed caml-types.el from Damien Doligez. The debian-legal response to my request on this bug report has been less than thrilling (basically arguig that it would be polite to RMS not to distribute non-GPL compatible .el files :/). So, what is our position on this, both individually and as a group ? Friendly, Sven Luther
