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

Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware



Antoine Beaupré dijo [Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 11:33:15AM -0400]:
> > Since I started talking about this, Ansgar has already added dak
> > support for a new, separate non-free-firmware component - see
> > [4]. This makes part of my original proposal moot! More work is needed
> > yet to make use of this support, but it's started! :-)
> 
> This, however, strikes me as odd: I would have expected this to be part
> of the proposal, or at least discussed here, not implemented out of band
> directly. I happen to think this is a rather questionable decision: I
> would have prefered non-free to keep containing firmware images, for
> example. Splitting that out into a different component will mean a lot
> of our users setup will break (or at least stop receiving firmware
> upgrades) unless they make manual changes to their sources.list going
> forward. This feels like a regression.
> 
> In general, I feel we sometimes underestimate the impact of sources.list
> changes to our users. I wish we would be more thoughtful about those
> changes going forward. It seems like this ship has already sailed, of
> course, but maybe we could be more careful about this in the future,
> *especially* since we were planning on having a discussion on
> debian-vote about that specific issue?

You make a very important and interesting point. I guess that part of
the fallout might be offset by the changes being part of the release
notes, and being enabled in practice starting with the new
release.

However, just pushing a not-well-thought-idea: Would dak, apt, or any
other bit of our infrastructure be very angry if non-free-firmware
were to be not an additional component, but a strict subset of
non-free?

That is, all packages accepted to non-free-firmware would still appear
as part of non-free (and thus, users having non-free listed would
still continue to receive updates).

I am sure this would have as a consequence the prominence of several
thorns I haven't thought about :-) but it might be a way to address
your point.

> Gulp, such a big jump! :) I personnally feel that we should make it
> easier for people to install Debian, but I'm not quite sure I'm ready to
> completely ditch the free images just yet. Maybe we could just promote
> non-free images a little better, but I would much rather keep the free
> images around. I guess that makes me a supporter of option "B", if I
> understand correctly, but I am known for struggling with parsing GR
> proposals. :)

As the proposer of option B: That's basically what I want. "Here,
these images have little bits of evil, but are necessary to boot on
most modern hardware. Of course, we also carry those, that are
completely non-evil".

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: