-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Sorry, I didn't explain well. I said:
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wonder why we are supporting this packages in the `contrib' section:
* whose copyright permission notices (or patent problems) allow only
distribution of compiled binaries (and thus of which only binaries
are available)
* allow free use only for a trial period (shareware)
* are demonstration programs lacking vital functionality
(crippleware)
Are there many of them?
*----------------------------------------------------------------------
I just meant: Why do we support these packages? (in *whatever* section).
> In "bo" we had 33 of contrib packages. The reason for this is that due to
> the lack of source we are not able to fix any bugs in that package or to
> adopt the package to our needs (cf. discussion of file locking).
Why do we want to have such packages in our FTP mirrors?
Do we really want to distribute crippleware?
I was talking about making contrib smaller, so that, by policy, some of
the packages that are now allowed could not be distributed in *any*
section at all.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1
iQCVAgUBM6ZUbSqK7IlOjMLFAQHujAQAtOGMqhoC4hMcoMwn1xgthYukHMPLAOcy
1Udl8RjObgrngWoU8ZLzmVpe5KAxzyR8maXw5C38UXSrFKF+ywNo71L8z6DJnKVx
k+lBYE+XVQqwSrP6KzasRhhy40k9M3J2BeoXjMVkUUGbRCdtBAeBiCdPwwMyRX3o
ph5ieLMdIE8=
=uTrw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
