Re: Source packages in main building contrib binary packages.
Charles Plessy <email@example.com> writes:
> I think that if we were shipping a package whose description says
> "Install this and you will have your 3D working" and which would
> automatically download non-free software, we would indeed cheat our
> On the other hand, if a package is described as "Free software to
> download the proprietary driver foo and install it on your computer
> so that the Debian operating system can make use of it", there would
> be no surprise to our users.
The package would have the bug (release-critical, I think) that its
primary purpose is met only by installing non-free software. No matter
what the package description says, that bug would be there, and would
be grounds for keeping the package out of Debian 'main'.
> Some packages already follow this logic: metacafe-dl and others need
> to interact with some websites whose source code is not available.
> Despite this, they are in main.
They don't require the installation of non-free software in order to
be useable, which is where they significantly diverge from what you're
\ “Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as |
`\ society is free to use the results.” —Richard Stallman |