Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware
Bart Martens dijo [Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 11:59:44AM +0200]:
> > > If you mean official media, this is more radical than Steve's proposal.
> > > It would permit arbitrary non-free packages as long as users were
> > > informed.
> > >
> > > If you mean unofficial media - that's the status quo. In which case,
> > > this option is the same as Simon's and none of the above.
> > >
> > > Ross
> > >
> >
> > /packages from the non-free *firmware* section/
>
> My proposal does not add such new section ...
Right. I would _oppose_ your proposal if it is to appear in the
ballot, because a freeness _win_ of Steve's proposal is that... People
that need to enable non-free firmware don't need to pull in all of
non-free in order to keep it updated.
I often install packages for getting to know them, just because they
appeared in my list. And my list nowadays includes non-free because of
some firmware. So I have installed non-free software without
noticing. Splitting non-free firmware grants the user some more system
freeness guarantees.
Greetings,
Reply to: