Re: Software in main that is throughly useless without non-free software
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
> Hi,
> >>"James" == James Troup <james@nocrew.org> writes:
>
> >> Server != library. There is no linking. There is no requirement to use
> >> it with a non-free server.
>
> James> Hello? No requirement? What, pray tell, does one do with TiK if one
> James> doesn't connect to a server (non-free)?
>
> Theoretically, one does not provode the software to do
> _anything_. You may look at it. You may feel inspired to write a free
> server. You may take pleasure in the number of packages you have
> installed.
Then, _why_ do we have contrib in the first place? If the software
doesn't have to be functional/useful/whatever, why don't we just
abandon contrib and stick all the free software which depends on
non-free software to be in main? After all, you can look at it. You
can feel inspired to write a free replacement for the non-free part.
You can take pleasure in the number of packages you have installed.
> Do we have the right to deprive users of choices just because
> we see no reason to do stuff? Sounds a trifle draconian.
`Deprive users of choices'? Come again? We're talking about putting
something in contrib rather than main, not banning the program,
hunting down the author and gutting him with a spoon.
> James> I'd say the necessity to connect to the server before one
> James> can do what the majority of users would do with TiK is a
> James> requirement.
>
> Their choice.
No, this is the point, it's not their choice. A user has no choice
but to use a non-free server. Or do sweet FA with the software worth
talking about. I didn't think Debian was in the business of promoting
non-free software?
~~~~
Why is a requirement that is in a Depends line so much more binding
that a requirement which isn't? It's still a requirement.
--
James
Reply to: