[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Call for seconds: DFSG violations in Lenny

Hash: SHA1

Bas Wijnen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 02:23:46PM +0100, Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
>> Debian won't run on a large fraction of hardware any more.
> ...
>> To restate the obvious: After the transition a lot of current debian
>> users won't be using debian anymore.
> So what's the problem?  We want to provide a 100% free software
> distribution.  Appearantly we currently can't do that.  We're far on the
> way, but not there yet.  We may have thought we were there, but we were
> wrong.

Yes. But you also promise in SC #4:

> Our priorities are our users and free software
> [...] we will provide an integrated system of high-quality materials...

Without the binary blobs, unfortunately, debian won't provide an
*integrated* OS any more, at least for those computers that require
sourceless firmware.

You also promise in the first sentence of d.o:
> Debian is a free operating system (OS) for your computer. 

This also won't be the case, once debian won't run on my hardware any

> So indeed, people currently running Debian don't run a 100% free
> software system. 

With binary blobs inside or outside of debian, my computer will run just
the same. It's just that outside main it won't be supported by debian --
at least not officially. It will be harder to install, as well. Outside
main it's not debian that "provides an integrated system..."

I prefer to have the presently and regrettably unavoidable blobs being
supported by debian (and d-i) instead of having them not supported.
That's all. Debian has the choice of either violating SC#1 or SC#4. A
small violation of SC#1 does less harm, IMHO, than a large violation of

> Instead you seem to invent a new rule, which says "the number of users
> of Debian must be as high as possible", and you even want to break SC#1
> for this rule.

No, I just read SC#4. Turning present debian users into non-debian users
by sticking to SC#1 violates SC#4.

> No, I don't agree.  I don't even agree that this is a good target.  We
> shouldn't have "many users" as a goal.  It may be a means to help free
> software.  But you're trying to argue that we should harm free software
> for the purpose of getting more users. 

No, I don't see "many users" as a goal. But at the same time debian
shouldn't kick out existing users.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Reply to: