Re: drop or keep non-free - from users viewpoint
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 08:25:20PM +0100, Markus wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 18:40:13 +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > We should all boycott nvidia, as they are the epythom of evilness in
> > what consists of non-freeness of drivers.
>
> yes, i would never buy a nvidia card.
But you already have. Stick it out of your box, and burn it :))
> >> That's a point who i have never understand in this discussion. Every one
> >> can install whatever he want on his system, even if Debian drops non-free
> >> the driver and all other programs will still be out there and you are free
> >
> > It would be a regression over the current state of things.
>
> or an progression, it depends whether your first goal is to have more software
> or to have free software.
no, it is a regression, but read on.
> >> to install it on your system. The only question in my view is, if Debian
> >> will support this Software by using there resources, create Debian
> >> packages which are hosted on the Debian Server and promote this software
> >> with the Debian label? Or is the support enough if Debian gives everyone
> >> the informations to built, create and insert every software they want
> >> to there Debian System?
> >
> > Ah, let's move to running Gentoo, should we ?
>
> i don't know what you mean. What have gentoo to do with it? I think Gentoo is
> more non-free than Debian.
Not about the non-free issue, but about the build everything yourself
issue.
I believe personnally that distributions like Gentoo are a threat to our
environment and thus to the future of mankind, think of all those 100+W
dissipating CPUs out there heavily compiling stuff and the effect this
would have on global warming. But i guess this is off topic here.
> > Ok, so no 3D graphics for you, and you actually gave money to the
> > greatest enemy of free hardware drivers that there is. You are aware
> > that nvidia doesn't give out specs to anybody, that they insist on doing
> > all the driver work themselves in house, and expect people to pay them
> > to do so.
>
> I would never buy a nvidia graphic-card, this card was part of the computer
> which i bought 4 years ago. And because i have no special requirement for a
> graphic-card i have never bought a new one.
Ok.
> > A, yes ? And are you aware that no graphic card newer than the radeon
> > 9200 will have free drivers ?
>
> yes, but at the moment i think that would be more than enough graphic-power for
> my use. If this is sometimes not enough for my needs than i have to think
> about it. But also if i will use some days a graphic-card with non-free
> drivers i would never demand from Debian to provide these drivers because
> i think thats not the job of Debian.
But you never looked at the amount of users asking for help on the
debian user mailing list with broken proprietary driver setups.
Actually dropping nicely packaged non-free stuff will also increase the
amount of non-free related noise on the user support lists, thus loosing
everyones time, and diminishing the ressources available to debian.
> > So, and it was usefull to you ? Do you not think that other people may
> > need stuff from non-free today ?
>
> Yes, but as i said i think it's not the job from Debian to provide this
> software. This software is out there and everybody who need it can use it. But
> i think Debian don't have to provide everything which is theoretical possible.
> As i needed spim, there was a lot of students which uses Windows, SuSE,
> Mandrake, RedHat,... everyone has downloaded it from the developers homepage
Yeah, and which is why those systems are lacking the stability of debian
boxes.
> and installed it. I would have no problem to do the same thing. I would never
> demand from Debian to provide non-free Software to me. I think Debian has it's
> own goals an philosophy and doesn't have to make some single person like me
> happy by providing some non-free software.
But what if we could with a real minor cost ? Probably a lesser cost
than what you needed.
And coming back to the unicorn driver i maintain, i can assure you that
building it from upstream sources is not a nice and easy thing, as i can
attest by the amount of mail i receive about this exact issue.
> Debian is the only Distribution which is near to an 100% free Operating
proprietary bios not withstanding.
> System. If the free software community has one System to show the people "look
> at us, you can use a computer with entirely free software. Maybe there are some
This is not true currently though. But most people chose to ignore the
issue of the bios, and the proprietary firmware in most of the hardware.
> special things which will not work with free software, but the most things
> works really god" than it's Debian and i think Debian should keep this role or
> expand it if possible.
And, is this not what we are doing ?
> I think today you can use your computer only with free software, even if you
> have extreme proprietary hardware like nvidia. You maybe can't use 3D
No, you don't. Rip out your bios, and i challenge you to run your
hardware.
> power but a lot of people doesn't really need it. And if you need it,
> than you can go to the vendors homepage and take some drivers, therefore
> you don't need Debian.
And once you have messed up your system, to whom you will come for help ?
> > Yeah, but i believe that the discussion with the author carries more
> > strength if said package is in the non-free area of our infrastructure.
> > Also, you completely forget about the BTS, and the quality assurance
> > this brings with it, which are also an argument in this discussion.
>
> But the the BTS and the quality assurance are also available for non-free.
Yeah, but the GR motion planes to remove this.
> So non-free provides already a great platform for non-free software and
> drivers that developers and vendors maybe don't have many incentive to
non-free is shuned by all debian developers, and it is a shame for a
given DD to maintain a package there. It is only by the gift of free
time, and the willingness of the DD that the package is in non-free, and
upstream well knows that. It takes only a single mail from the
maintainer (or from the QA folk) to remove the package from non-free.
An external non-free.org repository would have full legitimity, and
would not be under our control.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: