[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >While this is true, it is incomplete: the driver Depends, in the >policy sense, on the device, and the device Depends on the firmware. I do not think policy can justify this.
>> Obviously any kind of device driver has limited practical use[1] if >> you do not own the hardware device, and so are programs like ICQ and >> AIM clients if you do not have access to the proprietary servers >> they connect to, but still policy does not require to keep this kind >> of free software out of Debian. >It's not just the proprietary server code, but the actual servers that >are necessary. That is, you need the machines running them -- >hardware, a black box outside Debian's control. So what? User's hardware is outside Debian control as well. Or you think that Debian should control user's hardware? This sounds a bit like DRM to me. >I do think that closed-system clients don't belong in Debian >(differentiating OSCAR, for example, from whatever the closed AIM >protocol of the week is -- I don't follow technical developments >there very closely.) You are entitled to your opinions however stupid they are, but they are off topic in the context of interpreting policy. >> [1] But it may be an invaluable source of code and ideas to use in other >> projects... >That source of ideas is not enough to change a Depends to a Suggests, >or we'd have nothing in contrib. I did not propose this. -- ciao, Marco
