Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels

[Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> wrote:

> Huh?  I'm not saying I pretend it isn't there.  Do I want to modify
> the source code?  No, because there's nothing I could do with it if I
> could. 

I had to modify my BIOS in order to get my laptop to work with my
wireless card. This would have been rather a lot easier if I'd had the
source code.

> "If software of class X is distributed sometimes burned into hardware,
> then Debian should distribute other software of class X, even if it
> isn't free, for different hardware."

I would say that "If software of class X is distributed sometimes burned
into hardware, then Debian distributing other software of class X would
not have a significant impact upon the rights of our users". As far as
freedom is concerned, both types are equivilently bad. The choice is
either:

1) Distribute the non-free firmware. Our users are happy.
2) Don't distribute the non-free firmware. Our users either download the
non-free firmware from elsewhere (bad) or replace their hardware with
parts that have the non-free firmware in flash (worse - no improvement
in freedom, and we've made them waste money and material)

When people actually get around to a decent "Free firmware" campaign,
then I think we'll have a stronger argument for not distributing
firmware. At the moment, the non-freeness of firmware isn't something
that seems to bother most people (even if they're passionate about free
software).
-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.devel@srcf.ucam.org