Your message dated Thu, 24 Jan 2019 10:09:38 +0100 with message-id <[email protected]> and subject line Re: ftp.debian.org: Please split up non-free has caused the Debian Bug report #781365, regarding ftp.debian.org: Please split up non-free to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected] immediately.) -- 781365: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=781365 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: wishlist Hi, One suggestion that's come up a few times over the years in the handling of the non-free suite is to split it up into several sub-suites. In the most extreme form of this suggestion, non-free and contrib would be split up into a suite for each and every package that's in non-free, where each sub-suite would contain just its package and the non-free dependencies of that particular package (if any), so that people can say "I want to install package X, but nothing else from non-free". While such an approach does have its merits, I do think it would require wide-reaching changes to dak in order to be able to support it, and wouldn't provide much benefit over a less extreme approach. If we scale this down a bit, I think it should be possible to support the suggested split today, and it would also be a useful split if we did so; but as I don't really know dak all that well, please do correct me if I'm wrong. My suggestion would be to split non-free into the following sub-suites: - non-free/hardware: for "hardware support" packages: non-free firmware packages ("firmware-iwlwifi"), non-free drivers ("nvidia-glx"), etc. - non-free/gfdl: for GFDL-licensed documentation. I first considered suggesting a non-free/doc repository; but most non-free documentation currently in Debian is GFDL-licensed anyway, and I also think it's probably more useful to have something which is considered free by our friends of the FSF, so that those who want can say "install whatever the FSF would consider free". I don't feel too strong about that, though. - non-free/codec: for codecs in the widest sense of the word. This wouldn't be just non-free multimedia codecs, but also non-free archivers, such as rar-nonfree; anything that contains an algorithm to encode or decode a particular file format would be allowed into this repository. In addition, I would suggest that non-free, as it exists today, would remain in existence. That is, packages wouldn't be moved from non-free to any of the suggested repositories; instead, they would be *copied* there. This would have two advantages: - Upgrades would not be more complicated - Packages that don't fall in any of the above categories don't have to find a new home, nor do we need to figure out other categories or create a generic "non-free/other" category or some such. Thoughts?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---Hi, I have some sympathy for this (I tried splitting of non-free-firmware once), but there seems no project consensus about this. I also don't want a huge number of components (like main, contrib, non-free) as these are not nice to deal with. So I'm closing this issue for now. Ansgar
--- End Message ---
