On 10/03/2012 10:07 AM, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
OK, let's vote here:
- how many people for using 'tainted' ?
- how many people for using 'non-free' ?
Any solution involving technical changes doesn't qualify for a simple
solution, and doesn't seems worth the effort for just a single package...
As far as I'm concerned, making it possible for mirror admins to stay
within the law trumps ease of use for FOSS believers (i. e. not having
to check the license of a tainted package).
So, if we're excluding technical solutions, I vote tainted.
However, I still think that Col's solution would be preferable, for the
same reasons that I think a free/nonfree switch in the installer is
preferable to excluding nonfree code from our media and installs
unilaterally.
