Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> writes: > On Sat, 2022-09-10 at 09:16 +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: > >> So the practical problems facing people requiring non-free software >> appears solved or possible to solve. > > As I understand it there are two problems solved by proposal A/E: > > Users who aren't aware of the firmware problem are directed by the > Debian website to download the free installer, they try it out, find it > doesn't work on their hardware and then abandon Debian in favour of > other distros, or ask questions about it to the Debian support channels > or the Debian teams involved in the image creation/distribution. They > always get the non-free installer eventually, but we have wasted their > time and ours by directing them to the free installer by default. > > Since the hardware most users use causes the first problem, the people > fielding these support requests see that the free installer is in most > cases not useful and therefore want to stop building or working on it. The problem is caused by hardware manufacturer chosing to require non-free works for their use. The blame for that choice lies on the hardware manufacturer, not on Debian. Accepting the blame for someone else's choices and taking on the responsibility solve the consequences of that choice seems misguided to me. It makes it harder for users to experience the frustration of such hardware themselves. I disagree they always get the non-free installer eventually: some end up learning about the problem and chose better hardware. Some end up reverse engineering their hardware, and contributing to a free solution. Some dislike other distributions taking a less rigid stance on non-free works, and will come up with work-arounds to get Debian to work on the hardware. If Debian takes on itself to solve the problems with non-free hardware, I think we are in more difficult position to ask for a change. /Simon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature