On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 12:23:06AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Anthony Towns wrote: > >What, exactly, is the point of removing non-free from the social contract, > >if we're not going to remove non-free entirely? > > Hmm. > To remove non-free, but not contrib? > To add new restrictions on what can be in non-free? (Currently the only > requirement for a package in non-free is that Debian can legally distribute > it.) > To move non-free to a separate FTP archive (rather than "areas in our FTP > archive")?
What about the BTS then ? Will we host a separate non-free BTS, or not ? Friendly, Sven Luther
