contrib
On Thu June 8 2006 10:07, it was written:
> Users who accept that they might need non-free software to use things have
> contrib (and non-free) in their sources.list. Users who don't want it don't.
> If this script is in contrib, it is very visible for people who have contrib
> in sources.list (a Suggests: would be appropriate), while people who don't
> want to be bothered with non-free things don't see it. This is exactly the
> kind of thing contrib is for.
<...>
> > Well contrib serves an ideological purpose that I share: not cluttering the
> > package database of people who are not interested in installing non-free
> > software (because they will have to install something non-free to make use
> > of contrib).
Nope. Contrib serves a technical purpose and a users feelings about
"non free" stuff has nothing to do with whether or not they should
include contrib and non-free in their sources.list. That the variety
of software available for GNU/Linux has expanded to the point where most
users can function effectively sans non-free, and consequently treat stuff
which is not free as a philosophical luxury, doesn't change what contrib
and non-free are about.
Ideologically: "We will support people who create or use both free
and non-free works on Debian." [/usr/share/doc/debian/social-contract.txt]
Technically: Debian can not work with some source code in the manner it
needs to--contrib and non-free are the mechanisms Debian uses to make
such code available in spite of those handicaps.
Note: the ideology at play here is not one of separation, but rather
one of inclusion.
- Bruce
Reply to: