Subject: Bug#4078: lynx should be in `contrib'

From: Michael Meskes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 15:12:54 +0200 (MET DST)

Lars Wirzenius writes:
> I guess I'm repeating myself, but oh well. In my opinion, the main Debian
> distribution (i.e., not including non-free or contrib) should consist only
> of free software, where the definition of free includes the requirement
> that source code is available and that the program does not depend in
> a significant manner on a non-free package, whether the dependency is during
> compilation, installation or use.
> 
> XForms is not free (no source). Anything that uses XForms is not free,
> because you can't compile it without XFree.

Okay. Thus it has to go into contrib. Right?
> 
> All the installer packages likewise. And *-?motif packages.

That's quite logical. How about adding a contrib section (or a no-source)
section to both standard trees. My problem with contrib is that it is
located outside the standard tree. If it were inside I'd say let's move
everything that's not completely free in your sense (but free in the
copyright sense) there.

> > behind your approach I still think LyX should be an official part of Debian.
> 
> That would be great, but as long as it depends on non-free stuff, it should
> go in contrib.

Can't we find a way to keep programs like this an official part?

> We need to have complete source code so that we can port packages to
> new platforms, or to new tools or libraries. I'm sure XForms is nice,
> but is there a version of the Alpha? For glibc? For newest XFree shared

alpha: Yes!
glibc: Don't know.

> libraries? For gcc with pentium patches? With profiling support? 
> 
> Placing a package in non-free or contrib isn't discriminatory, it's just
> honesty and makes it possible for people to choosing packages more easily.
> I'm all for having LyX packaged for Debian, and XForms too, but we aren't
> helping the user by putting it into the main distribution.

I understand your reasoning. But I think it's sort of discriminatory because
it's not under rex.

Michael

-- 
Michael Meskes                   |    _____ ________ __  ____
[email-masked] |   / ___// ____/ // / / __ \___  __________
[email-masked]                  |   \__ \/ /_  / // /_/ /_/ / _ \/ ___/ ___/
[email-masked]                |  ___/ / __/ /__  __/\__, /  __/ /  (__  )
Use Debian Linux!                | /____/_/      /_/  /____/\___/_/  /____/

---

From: Lars Wirzenius <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 01:04:27 +0300

> Okay. Thus it has to go into contrib. Right?

Yes. I think this is current policy, but I'm too lazy to check. (I just
like to rant on this issue. Facts are for lusers. :-)

> Can't we find a way to keep programs like this an official part?

We can say that contrib is an official part of Debian. And non-free as well.
They have different support policies, but that's true wherever they are.
I don't really see a need for a change here, but I leave that for others
to argue.

> alpha: Yes!

I forgot to ask about m68k, sparc, mips, and ppc. :-)
(But I guess everyone got the point, anyway.)

> I understand your reasoning. But I think it's sort of discriminatory because

It may be just a matter of opinion. I don't think I have any further 
arguments, so it seems I can't convince you that it isn't discriminatory.

On the other hand, I don't care about non-free stuff enough to think too
carefully about it. That may mean I'll have to change my opinion, if someone
has really good arguments for another point of view.

In the mean while, I'm quite happy with the current situation.

-- 
Rural sizes win <[email-masked]> <http://www.iki.fi/liw/>
Please don't Cc: me when replying to my message on a mailing list.

---

From: Michael Meskes <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 15:57:02 +0200 (MET DST)

> I don't really see a need for a change here, but I leave that for others

I see. But then I think we should make a difference between binary-only and
packages like LyX for which we have the source except that one library.

BTW are there other reasons for packages to go into contrib?

And another question: Is it really a good idea to have one (release
independent) tree for contrib resp. non-free. Wouldn't it be better we have
contrib-1.1, contrib-1.2, etc.?

And finally we should that scan the rex tree for all these packages to move
them. As I understand all motif software belongs into contrib, too. And how
about the netscape installer?

> (But I guess everyone got the point, anyway.)

I did. 

> arguments, so it seems I can't convince you that it isn't discriminatory.

:-)

Michael