Am 05.12.2017 um 10:19 schrieb Thibaut Paumard: > Dear Sean, > > Le 04/12/2017 à 21:47, Sean Whitton a écrit : >> Hello, >> >> On Mon, Dec 04 2017, Thibaut Paumard wrote: >> >>> I vote for: >>> 1- putting the non-free firmware on all our images, >> >> This seems more controversial than it needs to be, and misses an >> opportunity for us to express our values. >> >> Why are you against maintaining the fullly free images alongside those >> with non-free firmware? The issue is that the latter are hidden, not >> that there's anything much wrong with the former. >> > > Mostly because we should keep it (or rather make it) as simple as > possible to install Debian. > > I also believe this should be less controversial. I don't see any > problem with shipping non-free firmware on our main installation media > as long as they are redistributable, because I don't consider them part > of the OS. The user has this hardware, to use it she needs the OS to > upload that third-pary blob to her device, let's allow her to do that > easily. That's your opinion, but nothing that's near consensus - according to this discussion thread. For what it's worth, I don't agree on your opinion. For me, non-free firmware still is software, and we should not advertise it more than it's needed. There's valid usecases of debian *without* non-free firmware, so there's no need to ship it by *default*. I agree though, that (unfortunately) most desktop users might need non-free firmware. So we should make installer images with non-free firmware available and easily accessible. And the thread shows that there's plenty room for improvement on that. Cheers jonas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature