On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 05:03:46PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > * Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040710 14:27]: > > I don't think that the basis for a package's inclusion in main should be the > > packaging in main of appropriate content. That would be a waste of archive > > resources. > > > > The prerequisites for inclusion in main should merely be a reasonable belief > > that the program is useful without recourse to anything non-free, and > > inclusion of the basic set of dependencies for correct functioning. I > > believe that fulfills our requirements under the social contract, while > > minimising archive bloat. > > If there is any content packaged, than such a reasonablity becomes much > more apperent. If there is no content and no easy way to create such > documented, it is much harder to believe. Especially as some small
Certainly. But in no way should we be encouraging the fallacy that there *must* be packaged free content before we will accept a consumer of said content into the archive. - Matt