Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main

[Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>]

Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org> writes:

> 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.

I'm afraid that's not an answer to my question.

> 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.

You are suggesting that there is some "mistreatment" in putting a
package in the wrong category.  As in "might get the same treatment".

Is the idea that you somehow wound the ego of a package by putting it
in contrib?  That surely isn't right, of course.  But I'm stuck for
wondering.  If a package is wrongly put in "lib" when it belongs in
"libdevel", for example, or vice versa, there is no huge flame war,
nothing bad happens, we just carry on.  Such a state could continue
for years without anybody getting upset or much caring.

I just *assume* that errors in categorization will be made.  That
doesn't mean errors are good, of course.  But my question is: what
*harm* does this particular error (if it is an error) cause?

Thomas