On 05.12.2017 00:11, Adam Borowski wrote: > How exactly firmware is not software? > We may take a concession and offer non-free or parts of non-free more > prominently (as it's needed on modern x86, all wifi cards I've seen, etc), > but let's not declare that non-software. > > Thus, until the situation improves: > * let's make the non-free iso download more obvious > * explain why it's bad. No quotes from Stallman -- they're opaque to most > users, quotes from Linus would be better. > > On the other hand, there's only 297 non-free packages in Debian, thus I > don't see a benefit in splitting that further. Most of it is firmware or > docs with unmodifiable parts anyway. > > > Meow! And that's exactly the point - non-free is non-free is non-free. And will ever be. So - there is nothing like 'good' non-free versus 'bad' non-free. For which reason ever (sources not available, license things, etc. pp.) all non-free things will be non-free. There is no distinction - and it will be sufficient to put some firmware on an iso and name that iso 'non-free' - with all the things said above. The only real question in this context is: Is that piece of non-free software distributable or not? If so, it might be shipped.
This step will help some free software also a lot - best example is the radeon driver - the driver is free and usable, but depend on a non-free firmware. And i also see no bad things in delivering two images - the free and the non-free one - it would be nuts to put away the efforts that was needed to create the free ones. And for a stronger user experience there should be a script remove-non-free on the iso - the script or better the command should be promoted too: apt purge $(vrms -s)
