Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

reopen 353278
reassign 353278 tech-ctte
reopen 353277
reassign 353277 tech-ctte
merge 353278 353277
thanks

Hi,

I requested that ndiswrapper and ndiswrapper-modules-i386 be moved to contrib.

My reasons are:

  - The sole purpose of these packages is allowing the use of non-free Windows
  drivers.

  - There are no free Windows drivers for this interface, except a port of a
  Linux driver to Windows (cipe), which is only used on native Windows
  platform (since it is pointless to emulate it from Linux, where the original
  cipe is already available).

The maintainer refuses to move it unless you rule a formal decision or a
consensus is reached.  I think the latter is impossible, and therefore I ask you
to consider the issue.

Thank you.

On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:45:24PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 11:34 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On Feb 19, Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Nevertheless, if you think abiword and openoffice.org should be moved then go
> > > for it.  Just don't use them as excuse to turn warez wrappers into "generic"
> > > driver interfaces.
> > No excuses are needed, the definition of contrib is enough and
> > ndiswrapper has been uploaded to main using the same criteria which have
> > been used in the past for emulators. Stop rewriting history.
> > Please also stop insulting ndiswrapper users and developers by calling
> > it a "warez wrapper".
> > 
> 
> And for fuck's sake, stop filling up my inbox w/ this crap.  I'm not
> doing a thing unless either a) you people come to a consensus on the
> issue (which you have not in the past threads, and probably never will),
> or b) a governing body like the ctte tells me that it should be in
> contrib.  Otherwise, it's staying right where it is.  Honestly, I could
> care less whether it's in contrib or main, but it was a decision that
> was made long ago, and I see no reason to make the change.

-- 
Robert Millan