Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main
Thomas Bushnell BSG writes:
> So I said "why not put it in contrib" and you said "because then it
> can't be used by the installer". Now you are saying that even if this
> wasn't a problem, it still shouldn't be in contrib.
> Why? I'm flabbergasted that it matters at all. What does it matter?
> If it were put in contrib (by accident, say), how would this cause a
> problem, assuming that the installer problem was fixed? What specific
> problems are you concerned about?
It has been argued in this thread that if ndiswrapper were put in
main, it would mean that contrib has no point at all. One could
equally well argue that if ndiswrapper were put in contrib, main would
have no point at all.
There are benefits to users for putting software into the "innermost"
category for which it qualifies; consciously putting a package in
contrib when it could go into main raises questions of *why* it was
put in contrib -- and which other packages might get the same
treatment. If putting it in contrib were simply an accident, then
that bug could just be fixed with no policy implications.