The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: summary of non-free/contrib policy

> The enormous disadvantage is that we have two definitions of free:
> DFSG-free and free-to-distribute.  The second definition is vague and
> ill-defined.  As we learned when writing the DFSG, freeness is a very
> hard concept to define.

So, why do we stuck only to these sections - main/contrib/non-free/non-us?

As far as I understand, we have the following package gradation in
discussion:

1) export restricted (regardless of DFSG-complience, etc) - non-us/
2) DFSG-compliant, consistent - main/
3) DFSG-compliant, depend on non-DFSG-compliant   
4) non-DFSG-compliant, freely distributable
5) non-DFSG-compliant, not freely distributable

Wouldn't it be more logical instead of voting on where to draw
contrib/non-free line (between 3 and 4 OR 4 and 5) just create one more
directory?

Alex Y.

-- 
   _ 
 _( )_
(     (o___           +-------------------------------------------+
 |      _ 7           |            Alexander Yukhimets            |
  \    (")            |       http://pages.nyu.edu/~aqy6633/      |
  /     \ \           +-------------------------------------------+


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .