* Raul Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060923 22:59]: > On 9/21/06, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >In order to claim this as a reason for not excluding the package from main, > >yes, absolutely. That doesn't mean the converse is true, though, so we > >still need to refine further to decide which side of the line ndiswrapper > >belongs on -- so far we only have two tests which don't apply to > >ndiswrapper. :) > > I understand that some people don't want ndiswrapper in Contrib, > because it is free software and it might be used to develop other > free software. However, every piece of software in Contrib is free > software, and can be used to develop other free software.
It is not what I would like to have. The issue is: The maintainer has done a decision. Some people don't like that decision. So, are we going to overrule the maintainer's decision? Please note that ... > Put differently, a way of looking at the problem is: "Are there any > good abstract rules which describe what should be in Contrib that > (a) exclude ndiswrapper from Contrib, and (b) do not exclude all > software from Contrib?" ... the TC does not engage in design of new proposals and policies. What you do is however doing such a design here. Summarising, though I see reasons for moving ndiswrapper to contrib, I don't think the reasons are, especially on basis of existing policies, enough to overrule a maintainer's decision. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
