On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 14:59 -0500, William Pitcock wrote: > If we waited for a release to be 100% perfect, it will likely take > several more years. The good news is that the amount of inline firmware > in the kernel is decreasing. So, eventually, all non-DFSG > redistributable firmware can belong in firmware-nonfree.
Do we have an ironclad commitment to not add any additional non-DFSG firmware, period, no matter what? I would accept a compromise which guaranteed an increasing slope. But not a back-and-forth thing. Your reply focuses on regression issues, so is that really sufficient? We guarantee that, say, there will always be *less* non-DFSG firmware in each release, and we guarantee that there will never be *new* non-DFSG firmware. > If the NMU involves removing support for hardware, then no, the NMU's > solution would be in my opinion unacceptable, and hopefully enough > people agree that it would be rejected. Thought so. So the claim that "nobody is standing in the way" was simply false. People are standing in the way of a simple fix for a simple bug, and insisting on a more complex fix. I agree completely that the more complex fix is better, but it is simply not true that nobody is standing in the way of a fix. Rather, they have declared that only one sort of fix is tolerable, and mostly refused to discuss the question. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
