Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes: > Possible wording, which includes the existing option A verbatim: Thanks, I prefer this approach over Steve's initial proposal: it solves the problem that we would override a foundational document with a GR without the required 3:1 majority. I'm worried that if we publish only non-free installers, people will rightly be quite confused what the Debian project thinks about the meaning of the DSC/DFSG. I would personally believe that publishing non-free content as part of the Debian system will violate DSC/DFSG even if Steve's GR passed and were implemented: a 1:1 GR should not be sufficient to override the meaning of a foundational document. > We will publish these images as official Debian media, replacing the > current media sets that do not include non-free firmware packages. Like Steve's variant triggered Gunnar's modification to allow for both free and non-free installers to be published concurrently, what do you think about: 1) Having two variants of your text -- one that replaces the free installer with a new non-free installer, and one that says we will publish both free and non-free installers? 2) Remove the paragraph, effectively making your proposal orthogonal to the decision which images are published? This could be up to the individual developers to decide. Some people may want to work on a free installer, and some people may want to work on a non-free installer, and there doesn't necessarily have to be a conflict between those two interests. I believe the Debian project is permitted to publish non-free installers under the current DSC/DFSG (which it actually is doing today; just hidden), but according to the DSC it is not part of the Debian system. /Simon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature