Bug#587279: Clarify restrictions on main to non-free dependencies
Hi,
After five years of letting the discussion settle down, perhaps
there's a way to move things forward now?
Other than the discussion about foo2zjs I think that only Bill
believes that the new wording proposed in message #56 differs from the
current practice.
Moreover, as demonstrated by follow ups, the issue raised by Bill
regarding the possibility of an accidental installation of non-free
software appears to be a system configuration problem.
That is, the granularity of what should or should not be taken into
consideration when resolving a package's dependencies can and should
be handled on the package manager's side.
As such, I believe that the proposed wording is appropriate and open
for seconding.
Comments?
Cheers,
--
Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer
www.debian.org - get.debian.net
Reply to: