Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main

[Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Raul Miller wrote:
> On 2/28/06, Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Raul Miller wrote:
> > > On 2/28/06, Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> wrote:
> > > > What's so different between my own non-free program and my own non-free
> > > > card which requires a non-free driver to work with ?
> > >
> > > We can't distribute any hardware in main.
> >
> > We are speaking of something that the user has (and that is not in main
> > obviously)... please think in the context of the replies.
> 
> Huh?
> 
> I'll try again:

I was referring to the context of Ian's mail and Anthony's initial mail 
(3-4 messages backwards in the history) :

Ian responds to Anthony:
---
>     (a) libraries that aren't used by any DFSG-free programs are okay
>         for main, so packages like libamstd-ruby1.8 that provide a
>         library
>         that no package happens to use are still fine

I don't follow the argument here at all.  A library can still be
useful even if nothing in Debian depends on it, either because some
older Debian package still depends on it, or because a user's own
software depends on it.

The purpose of a library is not just to run binaries provided by other
people; it is also to allow a user to build and then run their own
programs.
---

I respond to Ian :
---
> I don't follow the argument here at all.  A library can still be
> useful even if nothing in Debian depends on it, either because some
> older Debian package still depends on it, or because a user's own
> software depends on it.

What's so different between my own non-free program and my own non-free
card which requires a non-free driver to work with ?
---

So you responded to my question out of its context... which was trimmed
down due to the 2 subsequent answers. :-/

The real question was "What is the difference for a package if it enables
the user to make use of his own software or his own hardware (whether free
or non-fee) ?"

I think both packages enable the user to use "something he has" (whether
software or hardware) and that it doesn't make much sense to treat them
differently when both are DFSG free.

I hope the confusion is solved now. :-)

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/