On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Bdale Garbee wrote: > Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes: > >> The question at issue in these bugs is whether it is permissible for >> a package in main to declare a non-default alternative dependency on >> a package in non-free. In other words, may a package in main have a >> dependency of: >> >> Depends: foo | foo-nonfree > > Yes, of course this is allowed. The standard we expect packages in main > to uphold is that they are functional and useful without requiring any > software from outside of main. The above construction completely > satisfies that standard.
Perhaps the motivation behind this centers around FSF expectations on Debian's handling of non-free? If that is the case, wouldn't this discussion be more appropriate on the new fsf-collab list? Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANTw=mpzoxkysmscnn_qf6ct2z7w6i4gqz7wx82qwp-6wfa...@mail.gmail.com
