Re: non-free firmware in kernel modules, aggregation and unclear copyright notice.
Oliver Neukum wrote:
As this has been discussed numerous times and consensus never
achieved and is unlikely to be achieved, I suggest that you keep this
discussion internal to Debian until at least you have patches which
can be evaluated and discussed. Until then Debian may do to its
kernel whatever it pleases and should be prepared to explain to its
users why it removed or altered drivers.
You seemed to answer my e-mail without reading it; what I was explaining
in it was: this is not a matter of patches, but of asking Where are the
copyrights notices, Who are the copyright owners, and Which license are
the firmwares under, and AFTER that, patching what should be patched.
Those three questions (Where, Who, Which) can only be answered by the
kernel maintainers, and this is in *NO* way a Debian-only discussion. As
I mentioned before, kernel.org kernel tree is, as of today, non-free and