On 19.02.2014 05:27, Vincent Cheng wrote: > I have nothing more to add on top of what Simon has already said, but > I wanted to address this specific point: > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Markus Koschany <apo@gambaru.de> wrote: > >> I really would like to see all free software packages in main. Either >> the package complies with the Policy requirements or it does not. > > That's a noble goal, but what I think would happen in reality if > contrib were to be abolished (as you seem to be implying...again, > correct me if I'm wrong) would be that all the packages in contrib > will just get moved into non-free. > > In addition to defining "main", Policy 2.2.1 also places a certain set > of restrictions, i.e. that packages in main "must not be so buggy that > we refuse to support them". If you move all contrib packages into > main, they would for the most part become uninstallable (for users > with only main enabled in sources.list, i.e. the default > configuration) given that they depend on packages in non-free > (excluding outliers like flashplugin-nonfree that are in contrib even > though they do not strictly depend on a non-free package). By > definition, being uninstallable is a RC bug and hence is something > that we cannot support, so they'd all end up with RC bugs filed > against them and get moved to non-free at the end of the day. I doubt > that's what you're trying to achieve... One of the current troubles with contrib is that people tend to interpret the Policy rather broadly especially the term "to function". I think contrib could have a right to exist, if people would apply the Policy more reasonable and be more considerate in regard to the larger picture. If packages become uninstallable because they have been moved to main, then most likely some sort of packaging error had occured before. Let's take src:sauerbraten as an example here. It currently depends on a non-free package but it is more sensible to let the non-free package depend on the free one instead. Thus you can avoid installation problems, if the package is moved to main. Having packages such as src:game-data-packager or src:quake in contrib does make some sense. Both depend on or download non-distributable content. Here you can view contrib as some sort of additional layer that makes people aware that they get a final product which is not free although the software itself is free. In addition contrib is especially useful in all cases where you have some package that needs another non-free one for building or execution. This could be a temporary problem and contrib is the right place to fix it. My main concern is that people often seem to act by reflex when they try to interpret the "to function" clause in Debian's policy. I fail to understand why software like residualvm has to stay in contrib although the program is free and fully functional just because there is no current input for it. Regards, Markus
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature