[Fsf-Debian] Clarifying Debian Policy

[Ian Jackson]

Clint Adams writes ("Re: [Fsf-Debian] Clarifying Debian Policy"):
> If I remember my history, this proscription amounts to the idea that
> a user, for ideological reasons, may select "main" and omit "contrib"
> and "non-free" from sources, and should be able to install packages
> successfully and have them be largely functional.  So I would read
> it narrowly.

In practice, though, I think instances of programs actually
recommending (eg in help text, prose documentation) non-free software
will be fairly rare.

I'm not sure whether Debian would want to take the same hard line as
the FSF on this question.  But if you know of places in Debian where
non-free software is recommended in this way perhaps you could mention
a couple of examples; it's hard to discuss these things in the
abstract.  It's quite possible that Debian would simply consider that
a bug, or want to add some kind of caveat or disrecommendation
alongside the information.

As a general rule I think Debian would be likely to want to be open
and honest with its users, and not see that as compatible with never
mentioning non-free software at all and pretending it doesn't exist.
But actually recommending non-free software ought to be a different
matter (in my personal opinion).

Thanks,
Ian.