On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:54:40PM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote: > I don't know. Call me an optimist, but I seem to be hearing a rough > consensus.
Where? Branden seems to believe that anything that Debian packages is software, for the purposes of the DFSG. A number of people would argue that small, nonfunctional invariant bits are okay, but anything more isn't. And you, and another group of people, see to think that Debian should distribute non-software that doesn't have to modifieable. Where's the rough consensus? > I think we're guaranteed to not resolve it this time around; solving > this would be too much of a distraction from woody. True. Probably better let it all pass for woody, like we did for KDE in the distant past. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] "It's not a habit; it's cool; I feel alive. If you don't have it you're on the other side." - K's Choice (probably referring to the Internet) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
