On 3/3/06, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For example, if there's free software being developed against > > WINE (as a UI, or whatever) then that's sufficient reason right > > there, to leave it in main. > > Counting the toy utilities that are bundled with wine, or only other free > software? I don't know of anyone developing free software against wine. > I've used it to develop *non-*free software; I could *imagine* someone > developing free software against wine, but I can also *imagine* someone > developing free software against ndiswrapper.
I think using WINE to develop non-free software could count as a use for wine sufficient to keep it in main. We don't require that our users use packages for free software development, just that package use doesn't require non-free softwaer. > > I'm willing to hear reasons why this reasoning is wrong, but if we're > > going to go that route I think we to think those reasons through and > > come up with some suggested policy that distinguishes between the WINE > > case and the cases that belong in Contrib. > > Well, I would note that at this point, we seem to no longer be talking about > confirming existing policy; if we were, I would expect that more weight > would be given to AJ's proposed criteria, since as an ftpmaster he's pretty > much the resident authority on what this de facto policy is. That's fine -- but if we're going to go that route I think we should propose that the text of existing policy be updated to accurately reflect these criteria. > But there's plenty of documentation for writing NDIS drivers, just as there > is for writing Windows applications. AFAIK, you can develop NDIS drivers on > Debian using mingw just as you can develop Windows applications this way. > Doesn't that leave as the only distinction between wine and ndiswrapper the > theory that one is interesting to free software developers and the other > isn't? Does this mean wine and ndiswrapper belong in the same section, or > do we then shuffle packages back and forth between contrib and main > depending on the results of surveys of some kind? If ndiswrapper is of significant use for people developing windows applications, I think that's sufficient justification for it to be in main. But I don't think it belongs in main if the only uses that put it in main are hypothetical. If we want to be fully abstract, a piece of software is just a (huge) integer. The integer itself is not what matters. What matters is what it represents to people. -- Raul
