Re: On the freeness of a BLOB-containing driver

[neroden@fastmail.fm (Nathanael Nerode)]

Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>If it comes down to "the driver, on its own, would not be acceptable for
>main because it is not functional; but as a practical matter, we allow
>it aggregated with the rest of the kernel because splitting individual
>drivers into contrib is a pain for everyone involved and not worth the
>theoretical benefits", I can live with that.

Yes, yes!  Let me say that this is precisely what I think.

>"contrib" exists for software which is free but fails SC#1, "we will never
>make the system depend on an item of non-free software".  Moving something
>from contrib to main that does, in fact, depend on such an item is a pretty
>basic violation of Debian's principles.

Suppose the thing being moved is not a vital part of the system.  Then,
although the item being moved depends on non-free software, does the
*system* really depend on it?

Then it pretty much comes down to what you said above. 
:-)

-- 
This space intentionally left blank.