Re: ndiswrapper
On 9/14/06, Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 11:58:57AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> "Every package in contrib must comply with the DFSG ... Examples of
> packages which would be included in contrib are: ... wrapper packages
> or other sorts of free accessories for non-free programs."
> It seems clear to me that ndiswrapper fits this policy rather exactly.
I disagree with you on that -- I still think "providing a compatable interface"
is the best way to look at this, as per:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2006/03/msg00037.html
Er... what is your disagreement?
While that proposal mentions policy section 2.2.2, it does not
indicate why section 2.2.2 is not considered relevant here. It
simply quotes part of section 2.2.2 without specifically
commenting on it.
> So, I'd like to propose that we issue an opinion that ndiswrapper
> needs to be in contrib, to comply with debian policy.
As per http://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2006/03/msg00130.html I think
you should draft up your proposal and we should just have a vote already.
Personally, I am not prepared to vote on an issue where I do not
understand all the proposals.
Put differently, I do not understand the distinction between
"The purpose of the ndiswrapper package is to provide an ABI layer
on top of the Linux kernel that is compatible with the interface for
Windows NDIS drivers"
and
"wrapper packages or other sorts of free accessories for non-free
programs."
(That said, I do understand that ndiswrapper is free software.
Everything in contrib is free software.)
--
Raul
Reply to: