[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: firmware is just data. we need to decide our rules for data.

On Fri, 2004-04-16 at 09:53, Humberto Massa wrote:
> @ 16/04/2004 00:53 : wrote Anthony Towns :
> >We serve our users best by doing two things: the first is making it as
> >easy as possible for them to get at anything they need from an operating
> >system, however free it is or isn't; the second is making it easy for
> >them to choose the level of freeness they want, and to respect that
> >choice once it's been made -- whether that means people want to get
> >at nothing that's not 100% DFSG-free, whether it means they're okay
> >with GFDL'ed docs, little blobs of unmodifiable binary-only firmware,
> >non-profit only programs, or whatever. My belief is that as we start
> >taking a stricter interpretation of what can go in main post-sarge,
> >we'll also need to start providing better mechanisms for people to choose what
> >bits of non-free are suitable in their moral universe.
> >  
> >
> You know, this one is a point of view that I understand and respect; it 
> even changes my mind relating to all this "evil firmware from hell" stuff.
> Maybe something in the line of the deb http://www.non-free.org/debian
> sarge-plus-one gfdl bin-firmware firmware-from-win-drivers-downloaders 
> sun-java ???
> Now, this would be really practical and pragmatic. Mmmm.
> br,M

I like that idea, it gives users the ability to still easily have a
choice whether they want their debian install to be 100% free or not and
also lets them tailor their system to their needs. Perhaps a question in
d-i to determine whether they want to use non-free.org for these
non-free firmware and docs would be appropriate? This way the user can
still choose either route.
Chris Anderson <chris@nullcode.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: