Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 16:27 -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 14:20 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 23:28 +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> > > Would it be a good compromise between SCs #1, #3 and #4 if we made an
> > > exhaustive list of non-free bits in main, and make it our goal that the
> > > list gets smaller between each release and not to add anything to
> > > that list?
> >
> > I would be entirely happy with that. But I have just been told by
> > William Pitcock that apparently we are required somehow to support new
> > hardware with non-free software too. So it's not a decreasing list,
> > it's an accordion list with no real commitment to the DFSG at all.
>
> Do not put words into my mouth. I simply stated that user experience is
> an important factor, and that if free drivers (*FREE*) which depend on
> non-free firmware are available, and the firmware is inline, then it
> should not block Lenny's release.
Huh? So you would be willing to agree to a rule that we never add
anything new to the list of non-free bits?
Thomas
Reply to: