On Monday 29 October 2012 23:20, Olivier Blin wrote:
> I would prefer B: adding a nonfree-tainted repo (+ its
> updates/testing/backports/debug brothers).

> Yes, that's overkill, it will clutter the urpmi media config UI, but
> that's the only clean way we have.

And it's a way that satisfy most, if not all users. Including me.

My only issue here is that we shouldn't start having nonfree software in the 
same repo as Free software. If that means having two non-free repo's where one 
is tainted, then so be it.
It's more important to do things right, than to compromize on our long standing 
values and murk the waters.

-- 
Johnny A. Solbu
PGP key ID: 0xFA687324

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply via email to