Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > What will happen to them, would they still be able to use the BTS for their > > packages ? Or should they make provision for having their own apt-gettable > > repository for people to download. I think not everyone has the ressources > to > > do that. > > I'm sure there is a great number of people out there who love non-free > software so much that they would happily keep a repository alive.
Please don't make such assumptions when replying to such a valid criticism. I maintain some non-free packages because I feel that they are needed, and I might not do it if the burden becomes excessive (such as having to build an outside home and BTS for them). > > If that will happen, the non-free packages will not have the > > guarantee of quality that they have now, and this will result in > > people downloading non-free packages from who knows where and may > > causes bugs, security problems, name space clashes, policy > > violation, etc ... > > We already have all those problems because of non-free. The only > program on my system that does not more or less always function nicely > and reliably is Netscape. Please don't paint all of non-free with the nertscape brush. Some stuff is in non-free because it cannot be sold. Peter
