Re: Firmware & Social Contract: GR proposal
Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>
> email@example.com wrote:
[ warning: quote attribution missing ]
> >> No. Ceasing to make commitments we can't keep doesn't mean we should
> >> stop meeting the commitments we can. Which is why the bullet points you
> >> didn't quote were in the proposal.
> >What do you mean that we \"can't keep\" the commitment to make the
> >kernel free software?
> >We just stop shipping the relevant drivers.
> As usual you forget that we also have that other commitment to our
> users, and that we used to pride ourselves in providing the best free OS.
As usual, you forget that our commitment to our users includes not
misleading them by changing our long-term mission every release, and that
we used to pride ourselves in striving for a free best OS.
As far as I'm concerned, reverting the social contract would change
little: debian would still need to be 100% free software. If some want to
argue that works such as images are not a type of software, then they are
arguing that those works are not allowed in debian (clearly stupid IMO).
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct