On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 06:59:55AM -0600, Russell Hernandez Ruiz wrote: > Dear debian-installer developers, Hi Russell, Hi Others,
> I feel the need to begin this message by stating what it is NOT. This message > is > NOT meant to contest the decision to include non-free firmware in the > installer. > This post concerns UI. > > Primary proposal: that the priority of the question concerning > non-free-firmware > in the installer be changed from "low" to "high". > > The current situation is that debian.org proudly states "Debian is a complete > Free Operating System!" with a big Download link. That link then serves the > user > an installer of Debian+proprietary firmware. That installer then proceeds to > install the proprietary firmware **without prompting.** Many of us do not find > this acceptable. > > However, I was able to confirm in IRC that the installer in fact already has > the > ability to prompt about non-free firmware (the repository, wholesale), if only > the user chose to "expertly" configure their system. > > User "cheapie" on IRC reports that he "keeps running into users over and over > again who seem to /not/ want firmware packages installed," and because of > that, > "would personally prefer for the priority to be high." > > Other users are also puzzled why Debian /seems/ to have decided to only allow > rejecting the non-free components via the even more expert, hardly documented, > boot flag mechanism. > > I suggest that it is not an "expert" decision to choose freedom. The user > downloaded what loudly purports to be Free Software, so they ought to be > offered > a choice to get that. Furthermore, it's just the right thing to do, for their > freedom's sake. > > Please increase the priority, from "low" to "high", of the the > non-free-firmware > installer question. > Convert that into a patch and/or merge request. > > Secondary proposal: improve the description of the non-free-firmware question. > > Currently it is worded thusly: > > > Some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. Though this > > firmware > > is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used to install > > it. This firmware has varying licenses which may prevent you from using, > > modifying, or sharing it. > > > Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway. > > > Use non-free firmware? > > I suggest the following wording: > > > Some computer parts require that users install programs on them in order to > > function fully or at all. For example, some Wi-Fi cards and audio chipsets > > may > > not function without them. This type of program is called "firmware". > > > Although not at all part of Debian, some non-free firmware has been made to > > work with Debian. This firmware has varying licenses which restrict your > > freedoms to use, modify, or share the software, and generally does not have > > source forms that you may study. > > > Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway, and > > automatically > > installed according to your hardware. > > > Use non-free firmware? Convert that into a patch and/or merge request. > It is important for users to understand the purpose of firmware, and the > concequence of selecting "Yes", to make an informed decision. > True > > This letter is primarily concerned with the simple changes above, but I would > like to document a good, relevant suggestion from IRC: to give a summary of > the > non-free programs, and a way to customize the list, so that, for example, I > may > consent to CPU microcode, but refuse to use the on-board network card. We > understand, however, that this is a much more involved change. > Kind regards, > Russell Hernandez Ruiz Groeten Geert Stappers Yes, it is me -- Silence is hard to parse
