Re: Bug#686481: debian-reference instructs users on how to install non-free software
Hi,
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
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-non-free
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!
http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/debian-reference.html
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
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch09.en.html#_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
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-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)
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
Osamu
Reply to: