Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels
- From: Matthew Garrett <email@example.com>
- Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 13:42:25 +0100
- Message-id: <E1DHhxJfirstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <20050322123230.GB21986@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <20050322164616.GA12864@mimosa.informatik.uni-freiburg.de> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20050324095937.GA4990@mimosa.informatik.uni-freiburg.de> <20050324130958.GA12413@cloud.net.au> <email@example.com> <20050326123114.GA31936@cloud.net.au> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20050327073946.GA15984@cloud.net.au> <email@example.com> <20050327075724.GC15984@cloud.net.au> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <E1DGzt0-0002jZfirstname.lastname@example.org> <E1DGzt0-0002jZemail@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Thomas Bushnell BSG <email@example.com> wrote:
> Matthew Garrett <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> Why? How does it benefit Debian if our users have to obtain firmware
>> from somewhere else to make their hardware work? How does it benefit
>> freedom if we imply that hardware with on-chip firmware is preferable?
> The DFSG says that's the wrong question to ask. The question to ask
> is how it helps our users to have free firmware instead of non-free.
> And guess what: you're proof that it can be modified usefully
> demonstrates how.
The choice is not between free firmware and non-free firmware. The
choice is between firmware on disk and firmware on chip. That's the
reality of the situation. I'd prefer us to adopt policies based on what
currently exists, rather than on what may exist at some point in the
Matthew Garrett | email@example.com