On Thu, Jun 08, 2000 at 11:38:31AM -0700, Syrus Nemat-Nasser wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Moore, Paul wrote:
Pardon me, but why do you folks think you will no longer have access to
Debianized packages of this non-free software? These packages would simply
have to be managed outside of the
Moore, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The endless issues over free vs non-free and other license-related issues
makes Debian look more like license nit-pickers than anything else. This
doesn't seem to me to be a good image to have. It's not done the GNU project
much good, and it would be a
Matthew, and Debian Folks,
On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Matthew Dalton wrote, in part:
The real change is that non-free will no longer be covered by the same
bug tracking system as the rest of Debian. This will have the most
effect on the packages in the contrib section that depend on packages in
Syrus Nemat-Nasser wrote:
Pardon me, but why do you folks think you will no longer have access to
Debianized packages of this non-free software? These packages would simply
have to be managed outside of the official Debian infrastructure.
Note the _have to_ above.
Who will do this?
On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Syrus Nemat-Nasser wrote:
Pardon me, but why do you folks think you will no longer have access to
Debianized packages of this non-free software? These packages would simply
have to be managed outside of the official Debian infrastructure.
Syrus Nemat-Nasser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8 Jun 2000, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
There is a General Resolution proposed by developer John Goerzen that
is under discussion on both debian-devel and debian-project, maybe also
a few others that I am not aware of. The nature of the GR is to amend
Syrus Nemat-Nasser wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Syrus Nemat-Nasser wrote:
Pardon me, but why do you folks think you will no longer
have access to Debianized packages of this non-free
software? These packages would simply have to be managed
outside of
Syrus Nemat-Nasser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Syrus Nemat-Nasser wrote:
Pardon me, but why do you folks think you will no longer have
access to Debianized packages of this non-free software? These
packages would simply have to be managed outside of
Andrew George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think this is a good thing.
Debian is a great distribution, and I do agree, the project shouldn't
be wasting time with bug trackking (except where its the deb that got a
problem).
Um, I think that's one of the main goals of the project :) We
Igor Mozetic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway, if this resolution is passed, I will consider switching to another
distribution. I have to maintain 11 Debian machines, and even so spend
quite some time on proper configuration. Before such a move, I would like
some informed suggestions about possible
Colin Watson wrote:
Syrus Nemat-Nasser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8 Jun 2000, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
There is a General Resolution proposed by developer John Goerzen that
is under discussion on both debian-devel and debian-project, maybe also
a few others that I am not aware of. The
On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
There are many types of users that depend on Debian. Most of them probably
have a mixture of motives that include both the political (DFSG) and the
practical (apt rules!). However, the argument that Debian should be
worried about keeping all
Syrus Nemat-Nasser wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
I'm worried about loosing contrib, waisting _more_ time
supporting some non-free or contrib software, and the explosions
of badly-made and incompatible deb packages that may result.
Point taken. I, however, am
On Thu, Jun 08, 2000 at 01:25:13AM +, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
There is a General Resolution proposed by developer John Goerzen that
is under discussion on both debian-devel and debian-project, maybe also
a few others that I am not aware of. The nature of the GR is to amend
the Social
On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 11:08:02PM -0500, Brad wrote:
For the curious, the command i used to find non-free packages was:
grep-status -F Status ' install' | grep-status -s Package -F Section \
non-free -
or you could install the vrms package.
--
Ethan Benson
From: Brad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
While getting rid of non-free is a noble goal, i don't feel
that Debian
can do it now without losing support from some parts of the Free
Software community (look at the reaction over KDE, and then think of
Netscape, LyX, etc etc etc) and without losing
the Social Contract so that Debian will stop distributing non-free
packages. If the GR is passed, then Debian will no longer provide the
storage, bandwidth, and bug tracking facilities for non-free packages,
including acroread, blender, netscape, jdk, povray, trn, and xanim.
One huge and
Where can we get more information on this subject?
Where is this being debated, if at all?
--- Chuan-kai Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just a heads-up guys,
There is a General Resolution proposed by developer
John Goerzen that
is under discussion on both debian-devel and
debian-project,
On Thu, Jun 08, 2000 at 09:44:56AM +0100, Moore, Paul wrote:
I agree with this sentiment. Debian is by far my preferred Linux
distribution, but the DFSG free or nothing attitude is a little hard-core
for me. I don't see any problem with segregating non-DFSG-free stuff from
the fully DFSG-free
I don't think this is a good thing.
Debian is a great distribution, and I do agree, the project shouldn't be
wasting time with bug trackking (except where its the deb that got a problem).
But to do this on a philosophical point is only going to cause problems for the
user base and make it less
Where can we get more information on this subject?
Where is this being debated, if at all?
In the Debian developer's mailing list. Feel free to join it and add
your $.02 in if you'd like (like most things in Debian, it's open to all).
--
Regards, | Does my signature block look
On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Eric Hagglund wrote:
Where can we get more information on this subject?
Where is this being debated, if at all?
debian-{devel,project,vote}
I follow -vote; there has been a formal call for votes (CFV), a question
regarding the wording of the CFV, and a formal objection to
On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Randy Edwards wrote:
In the Debian developer's mailing list. Feel free to join it and add
your $.02 in if you'd like (like most things in Debian, it's open to all).
... although in the past there had been talk of closing it to posts
from non-developers.
later (unless
Intense debate is already under way. Whether you are for and against
the resolution, let your voice be heard.
I find these ideological debates useless and a great waste of resources.
It would be much more productive to do some real work like releasing
potato, including security fixes for bind,
Title: RE: Notice: GR to remove non-free support from Debian
In short: Debian +easier configuration -ideology -:)
-Igor Mozetic
Answer: FreeBSD + ports + linux compat libs.
On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Moore, Paul wrote:
From: Brad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
While getting rid of non-free is a noble goal, i don't feel
that Debian
can do it now without losing support from some parts of the Free
Software community (look at the reaction over KDE, and then think of
Is there a chance that Storm or Corel or both would take over
non-free?
--
Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Manager, Dueling Modems Computer Forum
http://dm.net
I've been following this thread on debian-devel for a few days now...
I am against the proposal myself, but I don't have any say because I'm
not a Debian developer.
Andrew George wrote:
I don't think this is a good thing.
Debian is a great distribution, and I do agree, the project shouldn't
On 8 Jun 2000, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
There is a General Resolution proposed by developer John Goerzen that
is under discussion on both debian-devel and debian-project, maybe also
a few others that I am not aware of. The nature of the GR is to amend
the Social Contract so that Debian will stop
29 matches
Mail list logo
