On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 02:47:28 +0900, "Miles Bader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I think one complaint is that many debian users want to avoid what
> they consider non-free stuff. Previously this was simple, if their
^^^^^^^^
> idea of "non-free" corresponded with Debian's: they could just not
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> have non-free in their sources.list.
And has this changed? If a user's idea of "non-free" still corresponds
with Debian's they leave non-free out of their sources.list, and they
don't get things that they consider non-free.
> However now, it will be harder, because Debian is going to group
> desirable "free" (from the user's viewpoint, not debian's) stuff
> together with undesirable "really non-free" stuff.
It is just as simple for people whose view of free/non-free agrees with
Debian's as it was before, and it is just as hard for people whose view
of free/non-free disagrees with Debian's. So I don't see that this
complaint holds much water.
Debian has to pick a definition of free/non-free for itself. It cannot
try to cater to everyone's different definition of free.
--
Hubert Chan - email & Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.uhoreg.ca/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA (Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
