Hi, Hideki Yamane <henr...@iijmio-mail.jp> writes: > Is there any progress about non-free-firmware section?
Sadly no; I think some later discussion made me doubt that there was indeed consensus about having non-free-firmware (and only that and not non-free-doc, non-free-drivers, non-free-*). Nor about how it would work. I don't think we should add a new component without having that (component meaning main, contrib, non-free, non-free-firmware here). They are not nice to handle on the archive side. Ansgar >> Hi, >> >> I think there was consensus to introduce the non-free-firmware section >> and move the non-free firmware blobs there. I'm wondering what we need >> to do next? >> >> Besides the ftp team setting the new section up, I expect the installer >> would need changes to enable it instead of non-free when non-free >> firmware is required; maybe it still needs to ask for non-free as well >> for other reasons? Other teams might also need to add the new section, >> e.g. the release team, packages.d.o, ... I expect the list to be >> hard-coded in quite a few places. >> >> Then the release notes need to document that "non-free-firmware" might >> have to be added to sources.list. >> >> Finally we need to identify the packages that should move there. I >> guess all non-free packages named "firmware-*" would be a good match. >> >> Ansgar
