Re: potential MBF: first alternate depends not available in main
* Scott Kitterman <email@example.com> [110318 15:30]:
> Since they would have had to enable non-free, suprise would not be an
> appropriate reaction.
Again, just because they had to enable non-free does not mean it should
change the semantics of anything else. Non-free is not there for some
hypothetical "non-free junkie" but for users who "require the use of
works that do not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines".
If someone looks at a package with apt-cache show or at
packages.debian.org and sees no non-free or contrib in that and they
get non-free software installed by installing it with say apt-get they
have every right to be suprised.
Bernhard R. Link