On debian-policy, "Davide G. M. Salvetti" <salve@debian.org> wrote: > Patent restriction does not imply freedom restriction: they are two > very different matters. In other words, gimp-non-free is misnamed, > and (software license permitting) it should go directly to > non-US/main, which is main (i.e., perfectly free software). The > package gimp could thus suggest gimp-tiff-gif without any problem. > > On the other hand, if gimp-non-free was really non-free software, I > think we should not suggest it in any way from main, even if that was > the only available way to use TIFF or GIF. This isn't the case, > however. So The Gimp was a bad example how about bsdgames? If there was not reference to rogue being in bsdgames-non-free then the maintainer might get lots of e-mails asking where rogue was. Yes, I know I am pushing it a bit. Similarly with tetex and tetex-non-free. -- I consume, therefore I am
Attachment:
pgpFMbGL6nQBl.pgp
Description: PGP signature