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

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden@fastmail.fm>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Michael Poole wrote:

I'm not going to argue with your previous points, which are all
basically accurate.

> Related to (a), current programmable hardware cannot run *any* CPU at
> speeds that most users would accept for desktop use.  However, solving
> that issue simply requires training users to expect even less
> function[1].

There is a rather subtle, but vital, point here which you appear to be
missing.  Debian supports users of non-free software, and will continue
to.  The goal is to make it *possible* to run Debian on a fully free
system.  The goal is certainly *not* to make a fully free system a
*requirement* for Debian.

In other words:  If Debian is running on *one* fully free system, then
the Debian system doesn't require the use of non-free components.  You
 may prefer to use non-free components, however, and the Debian system
should retain compatibility with/support for them as long as developers
are willing to do so.

> It seems like this option is more palatable to Debian
> than helping users get the most function for their hardware and time
> investment.
That statement is a strawman given what I just pointed out above.
We understand that at any given time before the utopian free software
world of the far future, there will probably be components where the
free alternatives perform worse than the non-free ones.  Most users will
use a combination of the Debian system and a few non-free components, as
they do now.  If they start getting irritated with the non-free
components, they may switch to the free alternatives, and/or try to
improve them.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFE9M9jRGZ0aC4lkIIRApOZAJ90zk7TlcKU11FV1muKTa63XZUZawCcCNLf
dMpFEZyGbeo50SMf6Wclwfw=
=IPMP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----