Re: Summary of the DebConf firmware discussion
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> 1. Split up non-free?
> ---------------------
I think this needs to be additional subsets of non-free rather than
splitting up non-free, for backwards compatibility and other reasons.
This is why I prefer non-free/firmware over non-free-firmware for
naming these.
> But: what's a good level of split?
One per use-case probably? I can think of at least these possibilities
based on a couple of my old blog posts:
non-free/docs
non-free/firmware
non-free/drivers
non-free/web
non-free/comm
non-free/formats
non-free/apps
http://bonedaddy.net/pabs3/log/2011/09/18/revisiting-personal-software-freedom/
http://bonedaddy.net/pabs3/log/2009/09/19/personal-software-freedom/
> 3. Advertise the "unofficial" firmware-included media better?
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Yes.
This seems reasonable depending on the wording of the explanatory text.
> 5. Anything else we can do to improve the situation?
> ----------------------------------------------------
win32-loader, di-netboot-assistant and any future Debian installation
mechanisms that start inside an operating system should do some checks
for storage or network device firmware issues and prompt users while
there is still the possibility of downloading or extracting the
relevant blobs.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: