I actually disagree with the thesis of this bug report. Suppose that Github went away tomorrow, or was blocked by an oppressive regime, or similar. github-backup would suddenly have its usefullness *validated*.
Furthermore, it is very much an undecided issue which web-API-dependant packages belong in main. There was an inconclusive thread about this topic on debian-legal last December. I direct your attention to my post to it: <http://lists.debian.org/20111204195557.ga11...@gnu.kitenet.net> Given the large number of packages in Debian main that only work with proprietary network services (youtube-dl, xfce's weather applet, many many other examples), unless there's an explicit policy MUST to reference to back up this bug's "serious" severity, it doesn't seem at all justified to single out haskell-github. Joachim Breitner wrote: > Also, if the code was not separated into a separate libray, > noone would worry. Or if Gitorious or another github clone chose to clone their API (which seems very doable). This would then be the same as haskell-hs3[2] or other S3 libraries, which implemented an Amazon-specific API that is now cloned by the Internet Archive as well as being part of the OpenStack standard, with server-side implementations in Debian now. -- see shy jo [1] This is a dangling footnote from my debian-legal post. :) I was going to mention there that many general-purpose web browsers currently in Debian have code that only talks to a single, proprietary network service. Chromium is a particularly bad offender. [2] incidentially used by git-annex
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
