definition of contrib & buildd inconsistency
The definition of the contrib section of the archive reads 
Examples of packages which would be included in contrib are:
* free packages which require contrib, non-free packages or packages
which are not in our archive at all for compilation or execution,
There is apparently an ambiguity here since a contrib package can depend
on non-free in two distinct ways:
1. depends only at runtime, for example a non-free Perl or Python module.
2. depends at build time and runtime, for example a package which needs
non-free libraries to be built and linked to.
Which is the correct interpretation? If both are included, then all
buildds MUST include non-free sources. This is not currently the case.
If only 1 is included in the definition for contrib, then any package
which falls in category 2 MUST be moved to non-free.
Personally, I have no preference as to the interpretation but the current
state, where some of the buildds do not include non-free sources and
contrib packages can fall under both the categories listed above is
inconsistent and needs to be resolved.
An alternative which would remove the inconsistency is to make the
decision that contrib packages will not be built by the officeial buildd
network but have to be built as non-free packages are, on the unofficial
 section 2.2.2 of
Carlo U. Segre -- Professor of Physics
Associate Dean for Graduate Admissions, Graduate College
Illinois Institute of Technology
Voice: 312.567.3498 Fax: 312.567.3494
email@example.com http://www.iit.edu/~segre firstname.lastname@example.org