Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 02:46:21PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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
I think that's a *very* slippery slope. Think embedded devices; a lot
of them has the software on flash or even as ROMs. Would this software
be acceptable in main just because it was available on ROM too?
> freedom is concerned, both types are equivilently bad. The choice is
> 1) Distribute the non-free firmware. Our users are happy.
Sure, as long as we distribute it in *non-free* where it belongs.
Regards: David Weinehall
/) David Weinehall <email@example.com> /) Rime on my window (\
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/