Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware
On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 03:57:01PM +0200, Tobias Frost wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 07:39:21AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> > Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org> writes:
> >
> > > On Fri, 2022-08-19 at 16:23 +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> > >> Do we need to update the Debian Social Contract for that?
> > >> Specifically paragraph 1, which currently reads
> > >>
> > >> Debian will remain 100% free
> > >
> > > No. Just like we don't need to update the Debian Social Contract for
> > > having https://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free/: we just ship
> > > additional files that might be useful for people having specific
> > > hardware.
> >
> > I disagree -- what is being proposed here is to replace our current
> > DSC-compatible free software installer images with non-free. That goes
> > significantly further than what the spirit of DSC§5 suggests.
>
> It not being replaced; there are just additional bits in there which
> help people to actually be able to install Debian on some modern machines.
"All non-free bits are equal but some are more equal than other." Let's face
it, when we would start including non-free bits in the installer, then the
installer is no longer free. Regardless of whether those bits get installed.
>
> The guarantee in SC1 that we will never *require* those non-free bits, as writen
> out in "We will never make the system require the use of a non-free component."
> This GR does not violate this promise.
With this GR proposal there would no longer be an installer without those
non-free bits.
>
>
> --
> tobi's 0.02 €
--
Reply to: