On 03.12.2017 21:17, Thomas Goirand wrote: > The FSF wouldn't be the only one. I at least, and probably a lot of > Debian contributors, would start hating Debian for promoting hardware > that needs non-free drivers if the non-free ISO was the default one. If > this drives some of our users away, never mind, we're doing free > software, that's what Debian is about. With all due respect - i can't follow here, no way. In that case i never ever has joined Debian nor spend an hour on it. So - first thing was to read and understand the Debian Social Contract. Do you remember, you once aggreed with this too:
1. Debian will remain 100% free We provide the guidelines that we use to determine if a work is "free" in the document entitled "The Debian Free Software Guidelines". We promise that the Debian system and all its components will be free according to these guidelines. We will support people who create or use both free and non-free works on Debian. We will never make the system require the use of a non-free component. ^^ And i take that dead serious - i work only on free software, but i use non-free too. And i think i will do so in future. 4. Our priorities are our users and free software We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free software community. We will place their interests first in our priorities. We will support the needs of our users for operation in many different kinds of computing environments. We will not object to non-free works that are intended to be used on Debian systems, or attempt to charge a fee to people who create or use such works. We will allow others to create distributions containing both the Debian system and other works, without any fee from us. In furtherance of these goals, we will provide an integrated system of high-quality materials with no legal restrictions that would prevent such uses of the system. ^^ Hmm, i can't read anything about: I don't care about users, they suck, i do free software. > Happy, but using non-free software. This isn't what Debian is about. > I've signed-up on the social-contract, and I stand by it. > >> What do we weight more: Happy users or free software? > Free software, definitively. If users aren't happy, it's not our fault, > but the one of hardware makers that are promoting non-free software. > Instead trying to convince Debian people, it'd be better if you spent > your energy trying to convince hardware makers. Cool - but i don't aggree here - i work hard on free software, not for free software. I want happy users to use this software. I left out the FSF part - nothing new. And promoting our free ISOs will not make them working better. If they work on some hardware or in some virt. machines - cool. But in real life a new Debian user has some hardware and not much experience in running a linux system. And do you really expect that a new user will be interested in Debian politics first hand? I guess no. If we drive those users away from Debian they are a loss for the whole FOSS ecosystem. But if they stay and become educated over time ... > It's probably that last bit that needs to be fixed. In my view, it'd be > fine to promote this ISO a little bit more, as long as we write in BOLD > that this contains non-free drivers, and how bad hardware makers are. > > Cheers, > > Thomas Goirand (zigo) > It is not only the last bit. And i don't think that 'a little bit more' promotion is sufficient. We should clearly state why we prefer the free ones. But we should not hide the non-free ones and should have them on the same site. With a clear statement why these images are not prefered. Cheers Alf Gaida (agaida)
