[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main

Thomas Bushnell BSG writes:

> Policy does specify that packages belong in the correct sections,
> actually.

Where is that?  I did not see anything like that in section 2.4 when I
looked before, and I do not see anything like it in 5.6.5.

> > The suggestion that wrongly putting a package in contrib is the kind
> > of error that one can live with seems like little more than a way to
> > push it into contrib without addressing the question of whether or not
> > it actually belongs there.
> Um, I actually have no opinion right now about whether ndiswrapper
> belongs in main or contrib.  I haven't got enough facts to
> understand.  I'm trying to understand the question, and one oddity is
> that some people seem to think it's *extremely important* in a way
> which is out of kilter with the issues as I understand them.  This
> suggests to me that I must be missing something, so I'd like to know
> why it's *extremely important*.
> In other words, if it is "pushed into contrib", what bad things
> happen?  If the answer is "none", then why the level of anger I've
> seen in this thread?  

One reason to argue so loudly is if one thinks that this is a specific
case of the general question of how hard-line or strict Debian should
be about defining main, and that it may be cited as precedent for
future decisions.  An alternative hypothesis is that since this was
argued a year ago, ndiswrapper-in-main advocates think it is a waste
of time and want to convey their arguments so that everyone remembers
and does not want to argue again in another year.

Michael Poole

Reply to: