On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 10:10:19AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> I think it would be better to create a distribution of Debian, where
> applicable, that meets the legal requirements of the given country.
>
> That way if you do really want to distribute Debian where there are
> laws against XYZ, you ca
> "Russell" == Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russell> Bad idea. Some countries have stupid laws and we should
Russell> not pander to them. There are laws against encryption
Russell> and against reverse engineering (which could get strace,
Russell> ltrace, and gdb)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 06:51:23PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2004 16:19, Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > 2) can not be sexist
>
> Bad idea. We should avoid subjective criteria.
>
> > 3) has to be able to be mir
Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How about you go off and create a distribution that panders to all the silly
> ideas. The rest of us will keep making Debian usable.
Um, I think Kevin Mark was making exactly this point.
Unfortunately, people try sarcasm all the time, and it falls fl
On Friday 03 December 2004 16:19, Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> 2) can not be sexist
Bad idea. We should avoid subjective criteria.
> 3) has to be able to be mirrored by all mirrors based on the laws of the
> location of the server
Bad idea. Some countries have stupid laws and we sh
On Friday 03 December 2004 06:19, Kevin Mark wrote:
> Hi fellow debianista,
> the package in question has not yet been accepted.
> For a pacakge to be accepted, here is conditions some have mentioned:
> 1) dfsg-free
IMHO the only requirement debian as a whole should care about.
> 3) has to be able
* Henrique de Moraes Holschuh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The only other real condition is:
>
> 2) is acceptable to one of the ftp-masters.
>
> So ask one of them directly.
Agreed, and I think they've done a good job of it thusfar. That answer
seems, to me anyway, to be an insufficient answer
Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi fellow debianista,
> the package in question has not yet been accepted.
> For a pacakge to be accepted, here is conditions some have mentioned:
> 1) dfsg-free
No non-free? But I guess you ment "accepted to main".
> 2) can not be sexist
Man is sexist,
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004, Kevin Mark wrote:
>> also, does anyone know of any other packages that never got in and the
>> reasons?
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 05:04:03AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> dvdcss code, and some other MPAA bait never did, I think.
Sounds like "Must not get Debian wi
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004, Kevin Mark wrote:
> 1) dfsg-free
Not a condition for acceptance in non-free. But then, that ain't Debian, so
your point stands.
> 2) can not be sexist
> 3) has to be able to be mirrored by all mirrors based on the laws of the
> location of the server
> 4) can not offend someo
10 matches
Mail list logo
