> [non-debian corel wp.deb example] As pointed out, *corel* is providing the deb to others; it isn't part of debian; they can just ignore the policy point.
However, it also occurs to me that this could be a clever little use of the reverse-suggests feature that inspired this subthread: the free package could have the reverse-suggest... so, for example, xpdf could reverse-suggest acroread; someone installing FreeDebian would only have xpdf, and the reverse-suggest would be ignored; someone installing the Debian Compromise Collection would select acroread, and then have xpdf suggested as an alternative... This would be an alternative, not necessarily a default; putting the burden on the non-free packagers is still better (especially when the non-free packager *isn't* the vendor and thus has no vested interest in the preference...) > sense: we should not discriminate against any *uses* of Debian (main) be > they evil or not. (We should not "endorse" them either but that's another This isn't *discrimination*, really, just exploiting our position as a gnu/linux "vendor" for the benefit of particular free software.
