[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#686481: debian-reference instructs users on how to install non-free software


This bug report was unclear and very confusing for me at first ...  But
I think he is the one confused or misguided, now.  I am CCing project
and zak since they seems to be the source of his argument.

If the bug reporter wishes to kill everything about non-free from Debian
related documents and archive area, I can tell him to go to the source
:-) "Debian policy" (Sure this is in our "main" area which is the real
Debian system)

 2.2.3 The non-free archive area

If the bug reporter can convince Debian folks in debian-project to agree
to remove these writings on non-free in our policy and make Debian not
to have non-free area, I will reconsider this bug report.

I know FSF always wants to remove any trace from Debian associated
activities.  But this fine line of making "Debian" to mean "main" area
is a compromise we established in Debian.

On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 10:24:58PM -0700, SirGrant wrote:
> Package: debian-reference
> Version: 2.46
> User: trisquel@trisquel.info
> Usertags: libreplanet, trisquel
> I am reporting this bug because Stefano Zacchiroli has called for a
> "free-ness assessment" [2].  It is up to the package maintainer on how to
> proceed.

So you are making me feel I am doing something DPL does not approve...
But I can not find which specific comment of Zak provides such rationale
for this strange bug report.  Please state it clearly.  Otherwise, I
will close this bug report very soon.

> *Summary:* Package
> debian-reference<http://packages.trisquel.info/source/brigantia/debian-reference>advises
> the user that non-free software is a solution to problems.
> *Versions Used:*
>    - Operating System: Trisquel 5.5

What is this Trisquel OS?  This seems derivative distribution.  I
maintain Debian so bug-ness should be based on Debian policy.
I see no problem with Debian policy.

>    - Package: debian-reference
> (2.46)<http://packages.trisquel.info/brigantia/debian-reference>
  ^^^^^ OLD!
  The latest version is 2.48

> *Steps to reproduce:*
> (From the terminal)
>    - sudo apt-get install debian-reference
>    - debian-reference
> (Program opens documentation in browser)
>    - Click: HTML (multi files)
>    - Click: 9.7.8. Non-free hardware drivers

Usually, we expect bug report to the latest version.  Things has moved.

  9.7.6. Non-free hardware drivers
> (Documentation states:)
>    - "Although most of hardware drivers are available as free software and
>    as a part of the Debian system, you may need to load some non-free external
>    drivers to support some hardwares, such as Winmodem, on your system."
>    - ect.

So what is the problem of debian-reference as Debian package.  I only
suggested possibility which is fact in written text.

Please understand the following are my understanding of handling
non-free packages.

 * RECOMMENDING/DEPENDING non-free package in the package dependency
   field is No according to Debian policy.
 * SUGGESTING non-free package in package dependency field is very 
   much accepted.  (You may not like this but this has been so defined 
   in Debian policy.)
 * MENTIONING fact on non-free package in the above context is never a
   problem.  Please pay extra attention to "may" in my text.  I
   carefully chose this "may" with reason.  I am not saying it is
   required nor recommended.  But we have fact on non-free driver HW
   which we need to live with.  Hiding fact will not make our life
   better or more free.  I do not think interfering with the FREEDOM of
   knowledge is good idea.  FSF which I supports is not such organization.

Please note our policy goes as follows:

 2.2.1 The main archive area
 * 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)

You see it does not require not-to-list for "Suggests".  It talks about
non-free area so policy can not put plug on my mouth either.
> *References:*
>    - [1] List of software that does not respect the Free System
>    Distribution Guidelines: debian-reference
>    <http://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines#debian-reference>

I think this your summary is sloppy and unfair.  That is your opinion.
Please do not accuse me of things I did not.

>    - [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2012/07/msg00016.html


Reply to: