Bug#587279: debian-policy: section 2.2.1 needs some tweaking

[Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>]

Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com> writes:

> I understand this section very well, and even with that lead-in wording,
> I contend that sufficient ambiguity remains that additional clarity is
> needed.  Otherwise, it wouldn't have been so difficult to deal with bug
> #449497, which essentially turned into a wontfix.

No, that bug is a different argument (the one about what it means to
"require software").

I don't have anything new to say about that bug that I didn't say at the
time.  I continue to believe that the current bug state is correct, and
that your position on that bug is not correct, although I understand where
your position comes from and I don't think it's unreasonable.

> The problem is that even though the lead-in uses the term "software",
> the actual "must" requirements use the term "package".

> Thus, a liberal reading of policy leads to the conclusion that if there
> isn't an explicit dependency on a package, then it's ok to have a script
> or plugin in main that makes use of non-free.

Here is the complete text:

    The main archive area comprises the Debian distribution. Only the
    packages in this area are considered part of the distribution. None of
    the packages in the main archive area require software outside of that
    area to function. Anyone may use, share, modify and redistribute the
    packages in this archive area freely[4].

    Every package in main must comply with the DFSG (Debian Free Software
    Guidelines).

    In addition, the packages in main

    * must not require or recommend a package outside of main for
      compilation or execution (thus, the package must not declare a
      "Pre-Depends", "Depends", "Recommends", "Build-Depends", or
      "Build-Depends-Indep" relationship on a non-main package),

    * must not be so buggy that we refuse to support them, and

    * must meet all policy requirements presented in this manual.

The words "in addition" have a specific meaning in English.  The bullet
points do not replace all the text that comes before them.

I suppose we could add a "must" to the "None of the packages in the main
archive area require software outside of that area to function" sentence
with some rephrasing, if it would result in having fewer arguments about
this, but I really don't believe the meaning is unclear.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>