On 5 Apr 2006, Raul Miller stated: > On 4/5/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> And for what benefit? Just like the FSF started by distributing and >> build software on non-free systems, putting out software that may >> initially be more heavily used with non-free input/output is still >> desirable, since it is a beachhead that can then be exploited for >> free purposes by someone out there, who may never be exposed to the >> software in question was its distribution to be severely limited. > > Has someone suggested that we should not build or distribute > ndiswrapper?
In Debian? Yes, I think that is exactly what we are talking about. > We've suggested that we not consider it an integral part of our > free operating system, but that doesn't seem to be what you're > talking about. No one ias asking it to be an integral part of Debian (like, Essential: Yes). We are asking to make it an Optional part of Debian. I see this as software that is free (it meets all aspects of the DFSG) that improves the quality of implmentation of the OS by allowing user to help themselves in their attempts to make the Debian OS run on certain hardware with less than stellar free software support. I hink that the Quality of implementation would suffer if we disallow this DFSG-compliant software from being a part of Debian. manoj -- As well look for a needle in a bottle of hay. Miguel de Cervantes Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]