Re: ndiswrapper
On 9/21/06, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
In order to claim this as a reason for not excluding the package from main,
yes, absolutely. That doesn't mean the converse is true, though, so we
still need to refine further to decide which side of the line ndiswrapper
belongs on -- so far we only have two tests which don't apply to
ndiswrapper. :)
I understand that some people don't want ndiswrapper in Contrib,
because it is free software and it might be used to develop other
free software. However, every piece of software in Contrib is free
software, and can be used to develop other free software.
Put differently, a way of looking at the problem is: "Are there any
good abstract rules which describe what should be in Contrib that
(a) exclude ndiswrapper from Contrib, and (b) do not exclude all
software from Contrib?"
By "good rule", I mean at least as good as "Free software belongs
in Contrib when all users of the software require other, non-free
software to make non-trivial use of it." [The biggest flaw, for this
rule, is that "use" means something different for different kinds
of software. A hardware emulator, for example, sees different kinds
of uses than a software api emulator.]
On the other hand, we also have debian's policy for Contrib,
which ndiswrapper does fit. Maybe "policy indicates it should
be in Contrib, and we do not have a compelling reason for it
to be in Main" is sufficient basis for deciding?
["It's in Main right now" might be compelling for the case of
Etch -- depending on how frozen Etch is -- but I don't think that's
a compelling reason outside the context of a release freeze.]
--
Raul
Reply to: