Re: Possible draft non-free firmware option with SC change
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 01:13:33PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> writes:
>
>> Wonderful -- it is good that I am able to finally express your view in a
>> way that you actually agree with.
>
>Yes, thank you very much for your thoughtful and productive engagement in
>this thread! It's really satisfying to be able to talk about things that
>provoke strong feelings and be able to have a productive conversation that
>helps both people understand each other.
I'd like to express my thanks here to *both* of you! It's been great
to have a healthy debate, discussing principles and trying to
understand each other. In the modern era of partisanry, this is
depresssingly rare and even heart-warming!
>> I agree purity leads to cults and problems. My view of this situation
>> is that the Debian project is climbing up the stairs of the pragmatists'
>> ivory tower to the point where it suffers from the ills of purism: by
>> forbidding the free installer, the pragmatist becomes the mirror image
>> of a purist that wants to forbid everything that doesn't comply with its
>> own ideal.
>
>> In my mind, the pragmatic approch is to publish both the free and
>> non-free installer.
>
>So, spoiler, while I'm going to vote E first (I have a policy of only
>proposing ballot options I would vote first), my guess is that B is going
>to win for precisely the reasons you describe. I will certainly vote B
>above NOTA. (For full disclosure, my vote is likely E>B>C>A>NOTA>D.)
ACK. B may well win, and I'd be happy to accept that - it gives some
clear direction! As I've expressed previously, my own personal
*preference* is for Option A. but I expected there to be opposition
there and I totally understand it. FTAOD, I'm expecting to be happy
with whatever the project decides here.
>In other words, I think we have a fair bit of common ground. My concern
>about having both installers is pragmatic; I don't think it's necessary
>and I think it's confusing to users (not to mention additional work that
>divides our efforts). But it's certainly not a violation of Debian's
>principles. My general policy for votes is that I'll vote my own
>principles and let everyone else vote theirs and rely on the voting system
>to reach compromises, but the compromise in B (and for that matter C) are
>both ones I'm happy with.
>
>I don't think having only one installer carries the message that you're
>seeing in it. I think it's just a more elegant and straightforward way of
>providing the user with a choice about whether to use non-free software
>and respecting that choice. But I completely understand how you arrived
>at the conclusion that you did and I respect your reasoning. In some ways
>it's probably more sound than mine.
Right!
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
Getting a SCSI chain working is perfectly simple if you remember that there
must be exactly three terminations: one on one end of the cable, one on the
far end, and the goat, terminated over the SCSI chain with a silver-handled
knife whilst burning *black* candles. --- Anthony DeBoer
Reply to: