Re: Proposal: The DFSG do not require source code for data, including firmware

[Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>]

* Aurelien Jarno (aurelien@aurel32.net) [060823 11:28]:
> Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> >Le mercredi 23 août 2006 à 09:48 +0100, Enrico Zini a écrit :
> >>>        4. determines that for the purposes of DFSG #2, device firmware
> >>>shall also not be considered a program.
> >>I'd personally prefer the 4th point to read:
> >>
> >>          4. determines that for the purposes of DFSG #2, device firmware
> >>  shall also not be considered a program until it will become practical
> >>  to do so.
> >
> >I like the idea, but I think it could be better worded.
> >
> >How about:
> >	4. Determines that as a special exception to DFSG #2, source code for
> >device firmware will not be required until we have the technical means
> >to split them out in a convenient way for our users.
> >
> >(Not perfect either :/ )
> 
> Seconded.
> 
> This is a good proposition, as it does not allow firmwares already in 
> non-free (eg madwifi) to go into main.

I heavily disagree to this change. It makes the text unpredictable.
Please keep the current way and, if we want to say something, make it
something like:
        4. determines that for the purposes of DFSG #2, device firmware
shall also not be considered a program; the Debian project intends to
revisit this decision at a later time.

Also, we are currently converting firmware from the broken way (i.e.
included inside the kernel) to a better way. I don't think that it is a
good idea to make the requirements for the (technical and social) better
implementation tougher than for the old implementation (and also,
technical differenes shouldn't make an ethical difference).



Cheers,
Andi
-- 
  http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/