"Sergey V. Spiridonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Remi Vanicat wrote: >> "Sergey V. Spiridonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> In this case, I clearly disagree with you. By stopping to distribute >> non-free we will decrease the amount of good, and so act non-ethical. > > Where is this good, which we will decrease? Do you think that dropping > non-free will broke the upstream copy, or it will destroy the copy of > those who downloded it? Where is the harm?
It will make it harder for beginner to find it. nowadays, if you want to have the ocaml reference manual integrated into your dwww documentations, you only have to do an apt-get install ocaml-doc, with a source.list containing only official debian mirror. You don't have to do it yourself (because upstream don't integrate their documentation to dwww, as they don't know dwww), You don't have to look for some unofficial debian repository. All this will became more difficult if non-free is removed from debian. There will be less mirror (may be even no mirror for the debian package). If the non-free project is not done, then you will have to trust an unofficial repository, and when you are a newbie you don't know that this doesn't anything (well, if it is my repository). The bug report system might be less valuable, if I orphaned the package, it might more difficult for people to know it. And I'm sure that I can find a lot of others example of how thing will be less integrated to the debian system, and so less easy to use for our user, that are one of our top priorities. By the way, i can link the ocaml-doc package to the other priorities we have (free software), as it is the documentation of a free software. We loose. It will be the only thing that removing non-free will do to our user : losing the nowadays integration of non-free stuff to debian. -- Rémi Vanicat
