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

[Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>]

* Steve Langasek:

>   - The author's preferred form for modification may require non-free tools
>     in order to be converted into its final "binary" form; e.g., some
>     device firmware, videos, and graphics.

I would prefer if the term "firmware" would be defined or at least
explained in the GR.  Something like:

  firmware (data which is sent to attached devices for processing and
  which is not, directly or indirectly, executed on the host CPU)

I'd actually see some restriction with regard to interoperability
(i.e. some reasonably documented interface between the firmware and
the driver code), but getting this right is likely not worth the
effort.

It seems the present language also covers CA certificates, which is
fine.

A completely different issue is whether we take upstream's word for
GPL compability, or if we claim that something is not redistributable
because it contains a firmware blob *and* is licensed under the GPL as
a whole.