On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 09:56:20 +0200, "Miriam Ruiz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>2007/9/12, Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Miriam Ruiz wrote: >> > 2007/9/12, John Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > > An obsession with "freedom" that insists on removing RFCs from source >> > > tarballs, is absurd. Why not change the contract. >> > >> > You're not talking seriously, are you? >> >> Why not? Is it difficult to acknowledge that not all people think the >> same? Have you noticed that none of the GR end up with 100% on one side >> and 0% on the other? > >So, what exact change in the social contract are you proposing? From a random RFC: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2060.txt "Distribution of this memo is unlimited." With RFCs available to anyone with a web browser, it's absurd to say they're non-free, and a waste of time removing them from Debian. If people need that spelled out in a contract, then spell it out in a way that can't be misconstrued. -- Internet service http://www.isp2dial.com/
