Re: Etch timeline is unrealistic because non-free firmware is NOT being dealt with
Marco,
Marco d'Itri Wrote:
>In linux.debian.kernel Nathanael Nerode <neroden@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>>>>What can be done about this?
>>>Accept that most people do not consider this a problem?
[snip]
>>You probably agreed to uphold the Social Contract in your Debian work.
>>(Or were you "grandfathered in" before NM?)
>I became a developer long before the NM process was created, and I
>agreed to follow the "unclarified" social contract.
*blinks*
Wow! It's amazing how such few words, that aren't directed at a lurker
like me, or which couldn't even be considered impolite if taken out of
context, can still feel like a big "fuck you".
When I started using Debian, one of the things that made me choose it as
a distro was the Social Contract and the DFSG[0] that meant I didn't
have to worry about any of the code in "main". I care about Free
Software, but the DFSG and Debian's commitment to it has allowed me to
not have to worry about checking the license of any of the software in
"main". I always thought there were other people who cared even more
about Free Software than I did, with more knowledge of reading and
interpreting licenses than I have, who had willingly taken on the role
of separating "main" from "contrib" from "non-free".[1]
If I /do/ want non-free, I thought I knew where to find it and where not
to find it. At least I thought I did - not in "main". Ooops.
So, yes, I'm a sample size of 1 and my opinions /might not/ reflect
those of *most* debian users. OTOH, refuse to believe I'm alone, and I
doubt that we're a *completely* insignificant minority.
It is really unlucky of you to not have the time to actually propose the
GR that would prove you wro^Hight in that regard. Still, if it's the
majority you want to follow, why not just go and start developing for
Windows instead? :-P
Anyway, thanks for letting me know how some of the senior DDs feel,
especially those who, while being aware of the clarified Social Contract
and Debian's commitment to it, have not had the honor/integrity/balls to
either make a personal commitment to follow it themselves or resign
their positions, just because they've been around longer than it has.
Guess I ought to start looking for another distro. Is there one that DDs
look down upon as being "even anal about licensing issues than us", or
am I completely SOL?
Adam
[0] Although, now I'm here, apt is /almost/ as important as the DFSG. :)
[1] Yes, I know that some packages in main do have some "non-free" code
in them. But I always understood that this was mostly accidental/had
slipped in "under the radar", and that Debian had a commitment to either
excising the non-free portions, or moving the package out of "main" at
some point.
--
To describe religions as mind viruses is sometimes interpreted as
contemptuous or even hostile. It is both.
-- Richard Dawkins - "A Devil's Chaplain"
Reply to: