Re: Debian non-free-firmware policy making OS misleading and Free Software unfriendly
On 21 Apr 2024 13:58 -0700, from reidbox@proinbox.com (Reid):
> You seem to be suggesting that Debian users now need to read XX
> pages of release notes and guides in order to learn that what
> they're installing is not what the Debian.org homepage "Why Debian",
> "Our Philosophy", and "Who We Are / What We Do" pages are currently
> promoting Debian as.
>
> That's not right. Period. If the Installers are not ALL going to
> give users the choice to opt-in or opt-out of non-free components,
> then those above-mentioned promotional pages really need to be
> updated so as to not be misleading users.
I'm saying that _this hasn't changed_ between Bullseye and Bookworm.
Reading the release notes or the installation guide has been very
strongly recommended practice for a _very_ long time; and the
_documented_ behavior of the installer, except for the non-free /
non-free-firmware split, is essentially unchanged in this regard.
Lambasting the Debian developers with a post on the Debian _users_
mailing list seems to me to be unlikely to lead to the improvements
which you clearly seek. Making a _reasoned_ bug report against the
appropriate package, _without_ including pages of hyperbole, seems
more likely to have a _constructive_ outcome for everyone involved.
> But BETTER yet, why not just update all the installers to give users
> that choice? That's what I'm strongly suggesting. Something very
> wrong/misleading/deceptive is happening right now.
If that's what you are suggesting, _I_ suggest to make a wishlist bug
report to that effect against the appropriate packages, which is how
such suggestions are made and tracked in Debian. Again, _without_
pages of hyperbole which can only serve to annoy and detract from the
point you seem to be trying to make. (Yes, I'm sure you feel
differently, but consider what is relevant for someone trying to
triage or fix an issue rather than your feelings about it.) If you're
able to also provide a proposed patch to that effect, then that's even
better.
I also suggest to please take a moment to read through the Debian Code
of Conduct <https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct>. May I suggest
paying particular attention to point 2 "assume good faith" and point 4
"try to be concise"? It's certainly fine to elaborate on the reasoning
behind the point you're making, but especially if you elaborate at
length (and I would certainly call ~1700 words "at length" in this
context), the specific point you're making should ideally be up front
so that people can quickly and easily tell what you're talking about
and whether that's relevant to them. Consider that a courtesy to the
some 3000 people on this list.
--
Michael Kjörling 🔗 https://michael.kjorling.se
“Remember when, on the Internet, nobody cared that you were a dog?”
Reply to: