On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 07:58:06AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Mon, 07 Aug 2017, Dr. Bas Wijnen wrote: > > Ah, that's good then! Still, I think its description has the same > > problem as certspotter, namely that it recommends the use of a > > non-free service. In Debian, I would prefer to see a recommendation > > for the free alternative, while the non-free alternative may be > > mentioned (or not, depending on what users need). > > An important counterpoint is that the long description helps with the > discoverability of a package. Mentioning a famous non-free service helps > users discover the package and also notice that there are free > alternatives. Yes, I agree. If the non-free service is famous, I think it makes sense to mention it. However, even in that case I think we should still recommend the free option(s). If the free options are limited to a point where it does not make sense to recommend them to our users, that means the non-free service should be recommended and IMO that means the program should be in contrib. Thanks, Bas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature