On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:47:46AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > To address the original point, however: > I do believe that policy is correct in it's reasoning in this instance. By > my understanding, packages go into contrib for one of three reasons: > 1) They strictly depend on non-free software; > 2) They build-depend on non-free software, but otherwise depend entirely on > free software; or > 3) They install non-free software. > In each case, the actual contents of the package itself is DFSG-free. > Apart from item (2), which I can't think of a major example of at present > (OOo is in main because they just don't build the Java parts, AIUI), Still in contrib, last I knew. > The mechanism by which the non-free software will come to be on your system > (by hook or by crook, as it were) isn't a fundamental difference, IMO. The fundamental difference is that, in your first two cases above, you're actually installing some free software that has value of its own and presumably would be moved to main if the non-free software it depended on was reimplemented or otherwise freed; whereas in the third case, the free software is only useful *so long as* the non-free software in question is non-free. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpkHQEzDu_WU.pgp
Description: PGP signature