Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main (was: Bug#353277: should be in contrib)
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 07:04:27PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > In this case, even in the absence of free NDIS
> > drivers, one could argue that the utility of having ndiswrapper in main
> > (especially if it is integrated into the install) outweighs any potential
> > drawbacks (and since the only drawback I can see is pissing off
> > zealots/fundamentalists, I'd be all for it.)
> One could argue many things, but since we're trying to make a free
> operating system, maybe we could resist that temptation. I assume,
> btw, you count me as one of the zealots/fundamentalists you're eager to
> piss off.
Don't assume things, it can cloud your judgement. Our goal is to make a free
*and useful* operating system. If you believe that keeping a piece of
completely free software out of main that would allow our users to enable
their wireless ethernet cards during installation is the right thing to do,
even though the package is completely usable without any non-free code, that
makes you sound pretty backwards to me.
> > What is relevant is that ndiswrapper technically meets all requirements for
> > inclusion into main. Did I miss a solid argument refuting that assertion?
> I doubt it; I think you're just confusing "argument that I disagree with"
> with "argument that is unsound or irrational".
So give a reference or Message-ID of (what you consider) a sound argument
that is not similar to "CIPE, and Windows driver developers who want to test
on Linux don't count."
Adam McKenna <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>