Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think that if we were shipping a package whose description says > "Install this and you will have your 3D working" and which would > automatically download non-free software, we would indeed cheat our > users. > > On the other hand, if a package is described as "Free software to > download the proprietary driver foo and install it on your computer > so that the Debian operating system can make use of it", there would > be no surprise to our users.
The package would have the bug (release-critical, I think) that its primary purpose is met only by installing non-free software. No matter what the package description says, that bug would be there, and would be grounds for keeping the package out of Debian 'main'. > Some packages already follow this logic: metacafe-dl and others need > to interact with some websites whose source code is not available. > Despite this, they are in main. They don't require the installation of non-free software in order to be useable, which is where they significantly diverge from what you're proposing above. -- \ “Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as | `\ society is free to use the results.” —Richard Stallman | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
