Hi, This bug report was unclear and very confusing for me at first ... But I think he is the one confused or misguided, now. I am CCing project and zak since they seems to be the source of his argument.
If the bug reporter wishes to kill everything about non-free from Debian related documents and archive area, I can tell him to go to the source :-) "Debian policy" (Sure this is in our "main" area which is the real Debian system) 2.2.3 The non-free archive area http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-non-free If the bug reporter can convince Debian folks in debian-project to agree to remove these writings on non-free in our policy and make Debian not to have non-free area, I will reconsider this bug report. I know FSF always wants to remove any trace from Debian associated activities. But this fine line of making "Debian" to mean "main" area is a compromise we established in Debian. On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 10:24:58PM -0700, SirGrant wrote: > Package: debian-reference > Version: 2.46 > User: trisq...@trisquel.info > Usertags: libreplanet, trisquel > > I am reporting this bug because Stefano Zacchiroli has called for a > "free-ness assessment" [2]. It is up to the package maintainer on how to > proceed. So you are making me feel I am doing something DPL does not approve... But I can not find which specific comment of Zak provides such rationale for this strange bug report. Please state it clearly. Otherwise, I will close this bug report very soon. > *Summary:* Package > debian-reference<http://packages.trisquel.info/source/brigantia/debian-reference>advises > the user that non-free software is a solution to problems. > > *Versions Used:* > > - Operating System: Trisquel 5.5 What is this Trisquel OS? This seems derivative distribution. I maintain Debian so bug-ness should be based on Debian policy. I see no problem with Debian policy. > - Package: debian-reference > (2.46)<http://packages.trisquel.info/brigantia/debian-reference> ^^^^^ OLD! http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/debian-reference.html The latest version is 2.48 > *Steps to reproduce:* > > (From the terminal) > > - sudo apt-get install debian-reference > - debian-reference > > (Program opens documentation in browser) > > - Click: HTML (multi files) > - Click: 9.7.8. Non-free hardware drivers Usually, we expect bug report to the latest version. Things has moved. 9.7.6. Non-free hardware drivers http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch09.en.html#_non_free_hardware_drivers > (Documentation states:) > > - "Although most of hardware drivers are available as free software and > as a part of the Debian system, you may need to load some non-free external > drivers to support some hardwares, such as Winmodem, on your system." > - ect. So what is the problem of debian-reference as Debian package. I only suggested possibility which is fact in written text. Please understand the following are my understanding of handling non-free packages. * RECOMMENDING/DEPENDING non-free package in the package dependency field is No according to Debian policy. * SUGGESTING non-free package in package dependency field is very much accepted. (You may not like this but this has been so defined in Debian policy.) * MENTIONING fact on non-free package in the above context is never a problem. Please pay extra attention to "may" in my text. I carefully chose this "may" with reason. I am not saying it is required nor recommended. But we have fact on non-free driver HW which we need to live with. Hiding fact will not make our life better or more free. I do not think interfering with the FREEDOM of knowledge is good idea. FSF which I supports is not such organization. Please note our policy goes as follows: 2.2.1 The main archive area http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-main * must not require or recommend a package outside of main for compilation or execution (thus, the package must not declare a "Pre-Depends", "Depends", "Recommends", "Build-Depends", or "Build-Depends-Indep" relationship on a non-main package) You see it does not require not-to-list for "Suggests". It talks about non-free area so policy can not put plug on my mouth either. > *References:* > > - [1] List of software that does not respect the Free System > Distribution Guidelines: debian-reference > > <http://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines#debian-reference> I think this your summary is sloppy and unfair. That is your opinion. Please do not accuse me of things I did not. > - [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2012/07/msg00016.html Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
