On 04.12.2017 19:03, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 05:36:30PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Lars Wirzenius writes ("Re: Debian Stretch new user report (vs Linux Mint)"):
>>> Myself, I would prefer us to keep both the free-software-only ISO and
>>> the non-free ISO with firmware and other things needed to get typical
>>> modern hardware running, and improve the discoverability of the
>>> latter. I think we can do that without having to have a GR to change
>>> the Social Contract or the DFSG.
>> Yes.
> yes, I also agree this would work and be better than the status-quo.
> however I'm inclined to believe doing this and adding a fourth repo,
> non-free-firmware (additionally to main, contrib and non-free) would
> be even better and also not need a GR.
I like that this *finally* gets some traction. I have floated a GR
before but people seem to be reluctant to have yet another vote.
I guess the question from my side is if the list of archive components
in §5 of the Social Contract is supposed to be exhaustive or not. I.e.
if we need to change that or not. If we don't need to: yay. (Maybe
because we editorially consider firmware not to be software or something.)
Is that something the secretary could tell us? :P
Kind regards and thanks
Philipp Kern
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature