Le 1 oct. 2017 09:49, "Ben Finney" <bign...@debian.org> a écrit :
Ghislain Vaillant <ghisv...@gmail.com> writes: > Don't get me wrong, I understand the rationales from a DFSG > perspective. I am just questioning whether users of this particular > piece of software would particularly care. The same could be asked of many user-facing packages in Debian. Your question, though, makes an incorrect assumption: that “users of this particular piece of software” is a group whose membership is unaffected by having the package in Debian. On the contrary. Take me as a counter-example. I am not a user of this particular piece of software, because I have little interest in judging for myself the hundreds of user-facing applications on my system. If it were in Debian I can then take all the assurance that brings about freedom and maintenance, and I may indeed consider using this particular piece of software where otherwise I would not. So, one important reason to package a work in Debian is to *increase* the set of people who can easily install and use it. All 3 means of installation (Jetbrain's app, snap and potentially apt) are one-liners for the end-user. So, ease-of-use is hardly a compelling argument. And I don't question your initial assessment about other applications in the archive. Hence myself mentioning eclipse earlier, as a similar package which used to be actively maintained until the effort died out. I am just wondering whether an effort to package pycharm would not reach the same outcome, assuming it passes the initial import phase. The Atom IDE for instance never did. Ghis