Re: On the freeness of a BLOB-containing driver
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.