Re: Going ahead with non-free-firmware

[Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>]

On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 11:51:08AM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section
> and move the non-free firmware blobs there.  I'm wondering what we need
> to do next?

I applaud this call for action; I'd certainly be an enthusiastic
user.

> Finally we need to identify the packages that should move there.  I
> guess all non-free packages named "firmware-*" would be a good match.

I think the *policy* for this section should be firmware, as defined
as code not executing on the main CPU, or something like that.

firmware-* might be a good approximation, but packages should be
checked that they actually comply with some sort of standard before
they are moved there, otherwise the new section will not have any real
value for those who want to only use non-free code as long as it
doesn't run as part of the operating system.

Dominic.