Thomas Bushnell BSG writes: > Policy does specify that packages belong in the correct sections, > actually.
Where is that? I did not see anything like that in section 2.4 when I looked before, and I do not see anything like it in 5.6.5. > > The suggestion that wrongly putting a package in contrib is the kind > > of error that one can live with seems like little more than a way to > > push it into contrib without addressing the question of whether or not > > it actually belongs there. > > Um, I actually have no opinion right now about whether ndiswrapper > belongs in main or contrib. I haven't got enough facts to > understand. I'm trying to understand the question, and one oddity is > that some people seem to think it's *extremely important* in a way > which is out of kilter with the issues as I understand them. This > suggests to me that I must be missing something, so I'd like to know > why it's *extremely important*. > > In other words, if it is "pushed into contrib", what bad things > happen? If the answer is "none", then why the level of anger I've > seen in this thread? One reason to argue so loudly is if one thinks that this is a specific case of the general question of how hard-line or strict Debian should be about defining main, and that it may be cited as precedent for future decisions. An alternative hypothesis is that since this was argued a year ago, ndiswrapper-in-main advocates think it is a waste of time and want to convey their arguments so that everyone remembers and does not want to argue again in another year. Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]