Re: ITP seahorse

[Torsten Landschoff <torsten@debian.org>]

On Thu, May 18, 2000 at 10:43:55PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2000 at 08:02:33PM -0600, Richard Stallman wrote:
> >     [ Should a Gnome GnuPG front end go in non-US/main or contrib? ]
> > 
> > I would put this front end either in non-US or in main, because
> > it is not a bad thing for main packages to point to it.
> 
> "Bad" is not the issue. The issue is that main is self contained, and can
> be installed without anything else but main. Right now our policy does not
> consider anything in non-US as part of that clause. Granted it would be
> correct to assume that "main and non-US/main are a single entity when
> regarding deps", but that is not the case right now. Our policy does not
> grant that exception.
> 
> I'm not arguing right or wrong, I'm just pointing to the rule book :)

To play the "common sense" game I would want to have it in non-US/main
for two reasons:

  + non-US/main tells the user it is actually free software AND it is 
    part of Debian
  + if the user does not have access to non-US/main he can not use
    this package anyway since it needs gnupg to run

Putting it in contrib means

  + we will have it on the official Debian CDs even without non-US
  - we will have a broken dependency on that CDs

Summary: It does not make sense to put this tool into contrib. non-US/main 
is the proper place.

Thanks

    Torsten

-- 
Torsten Landschoff           Bluehorn@IRC               <torsten@debian.org>
           Debian Developer and Quality Assurance Committee Member