Re: Debian Stretch new user report (vs Linux Mint)
On 03.12.2017 21:17, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> The FSF wouldn't be the only one. I at least, and probably a lot of
> Debian contributors, would start hating Debian for promoting hardware
> that needs non-free drivers if the non-free ISO was the default one. If
> this drives some of our users away, never mind, we're doing free
> software, that's what Debian is about.
With all due respect - i can't follow here, no way. In that case i never
ever has joined Debian nor spend an hour on it. So - first thing was to
read and understand the Debian Social Contract. Do you remember, you once
aggreed with this too:
1. Debian will remain 100% free
We provide the guidelines that we use to determine if a work is "free" in
the document entitled "The Debian Free Software Guidelines". We promise that
the Debian system and all its components will be free according to these
guidelines. We will support people who create or use both free and non-free
works on Debian. We will never make the system require the use of a non-free
component.
^^ And i take that dead serious - i work only on free software, but i use
non-free too. And i think i will do so in future.
4. Our priorities are our users and free software
We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free software
community.
We will place their interests first in our priorities. We will support the
needs of our users for operation in many different kinds of computing
environments.
We will not object to non-free works that are intended to be used on
Debian systems,
or attempt to charge a fee to people who create or use such works. We
will allow
others to create distributions containing both the Debian system and
other works,
without any fee from us. In furtherance of these goals, we will provide
an integrated
system of high-quality materials with no legal restrictions that would
prevent such
uses of the system.
^^ Hmm, i can't read anything about: I don't care about users, they
suck, i do free
software.
> Happy, but using non-free software. This isn't what Debian is about.
> I've signed-up on the social-contract, and I stand by it.
>
>> What do we weight more: Happy users or free software?
> Free software, definitively. If users aren't happy, it's not our fault,
> but the one of hardware makers that are promoting non-free software.
> Instead trying to convince Debian people, it'd be better if you spent
> your energy trying to convince hardware makers.
Cool - but i don't aggree here - i work hard on free software, not for free
software. I want happy users to use this software.
I left out the FSF part - nothing new. And promoting our free ISOs will not
make them working better. If they work on some hardware or in some virt.
machines - cool. But in real life a new Debian user has some hardware
and not
much experience in running a linux system. And do you really expect that a
new user will be interested in Debian politics first hand? I guess no. If
we drive those users away from Debian they are a loss for the whole FOSS
ecosystem. But if they stay and become educated over time ...
> It's probably that last bit that needs to be fixed. In my view, it'd be
> fine to promote this ISO a little bit more, as long as we write in BOLD
> that this contains non-free drivers, and how bad hardware makers are.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
>
It is not only the last bit. And i don't think that 'a little bit more'
promotion is sufficient. We should clearly state why we prefer the free
ones. But we should not hide the non-free ones and should have them on
the same site. With a clear statement why these images are not prefered.
Cheers
Alf Gaida (agaida)
Reply to: