Re: Bug#353277: ndiswrapper in main (was: Bug#353277: should be in contrib)
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 03:52:29AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 12:43:39PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > What makes 'running free windows drivers for stuff' so much more
> > unrealistic than 'running free windows software for stuff'? Especially
> > seen as how no Windows software is packaged for Debian, so that our
> > users would have to do this themselves?
> I can, personally, point to Free Software that I've run under Wine on
> Debian. I can't do the same for free drivers running under ndiswrapper, and
> I don't see that anyone else in this discussion has done so either. That
> makes the second case a hypothetical, and IMHO it seems to be a contrived
> one.
Emulators/games have been moved[1] from contrib to main after someone
has done free data files which are essentially "proof of concept"
in nature. I fail to see why availability of a CIPE driver for
ndiswrapper doesn't fall into the same category.
A requirement for main "must be usefull in a free software only
enviroinement" is the the beginning of the road to madness. Next
theill come for free clients for protocols that (currently) only
have non-free servers to connect to. Who the hell has the right to
define what is usefull anyway?
[1] sarien atleast
Reply to: