Re: Etch timeline is unrealistic because non-free firmware is NOT being dealt with
>In linux.debian.kernel Nathanael Nerode <email@example.com> wrote:
>>What can be done about this?
>Accept that most people do not consider this a problem?
First of all, this is false. Most Debian developers agree with me. You
think not? Prove it by proposing a GR. More importantly, the release team
agrees with me that this is a problem, and it is explicitly a release blocker.
Further, majority opinion is irrelevant on issues of honesty. Debian is
lying to its users. Debian needs to stop doing that.
Frankly, I no longer care which way Debian becomes honest:
(1) A GR amending the Social Contract to explicitly allow sourceless, non-free
binary material in Debian
(2) Removing the sourceless, non-free binary material from Debian main.
Debian must do one of the two if it is to be honorable. I don't care which.
You probably agreed to uphold the Social Contract in your Debian work.
(Or were you "grandfathered in" before NM?)
If so *you agreed* to remove this firmware. You have two honorable
(1) Propose a GR amending the Social Contract to allow it. Please do so!
(2) Remove it whenever it falls into your sphere of responsibility.
You have historically chosen to take the dishonorable option, and I do
not expect you to change, but I can hope.
Read it and weep.