Scripsit Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Scripsit Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> I'm ok with (1), provided we do it in the non-free archive. >>> This does present certain logistical problems for producing installers. >> Which ones? > non-free isn't part of Debian. Using loadable firmware is becoming > increasingly common in hardware design. In the fairly near future, most > modern hardware is likely to require it in order to allow installation. I fail to see how your response describes a logistical problem with shipping the firmware in 'non-free'. >> It would be a better course of action to solve those problems than to >> deliberately mislabel non-free firmware as free. > I'm not suggesting that we claim that firmware is Free, Putting it in 'main' rather than 'non-free' constitutes such a claim. That is what the distinction between 'main' and 'non-free' is FOR. > but putting it in non-free is: > (a) going to result in an awkward situation for installation, and You have not described any such awkward situation, as far as I can see. > (b) not likely to provide any extra freedom to the user The point is not to provide extra freedom *per se*. The point is to label things correctly such that the user *knows* whether he is getting non-free software. > I've suggested before that creating a separate section for firmware may > be the best solution. You have not described how that would differ from using 'non-free'. -- Henning Makholm "What a hideous colour khaki is." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
