Re: I am ANGRY with Debian.

"Michael Marsh" <michael.a.marsh@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

On 5/30/07, Max Hyre <max@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
You're not allowed to change or discard that lump. Isn't it at least
*understandable* that many believe this document is unfree?

Given one particular invariant section that always appears in FSF/GNU
GFDL'ed documentation, my preferred analogy is, "You can't skip the
commercials."

To be clear about this:

I do not object to Debian organizing itself how it sees fit. I am not
a Debian developer; I may never be a Debian developer.

This is how the Debian process dealt with the issue:

http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001

and I respect that.


BUT I find it absolutely astounding that people think that this vote
is a basis for going round removing documentation without providing an
alternative.

And, to remove GNU documentation from Emacs is tantamount to
vandalism. It would be better to move the whole package to non-free
rather than remove the documentation. It's such an insane thing to do.



Of course... if lots of packages are moved to non-free I might as well
use ubuntu. I've never had to use non-free before.

--
Nic Ferrier
http://www.tapsellferrier.co.uk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Relevant Pages