Matthias Urlichs <matth...@urlichs.de> writes: > On 08.03.25 21:09, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> I read this outcome as fairly clear message that, no, Debian does not >> want to provide a second set of installer images, and is not interested >> in contributions to make them. > > Another way to look at this outcome, and the one I personally prefer > by a wide margin, is that it'd be very cool to have them, but at this > time their utility is … questionable, given that I personally own zero > (out of umpteen) computers that would work with such an image. > > Not my NAS, not my router, not my laptop, not the Raspberry Pi that's > controlling my home's heating system. Or the other Pi behind the TV; > said TV is a far worse problem from a free software PoV than a few > blobs of firmware, but I digress. > > So why should a GR compel us to build a second set of images which > most people cannot use anyway? > > On the other hand, if you want to spend some time building those > images, fine, go ahead; if and when those images are actually usable > for a relevant subset of machines out there, *then* we can might want > to revise our decision.
It will always be possible to find machines where fully free installer images cannot run on. This was the case 30 years ago and most likely it will be the case in 30 years. It seems the disagreement is if that fact should influence Debian's decisions on what to provide to its users. It used to be "no", but now it is "yes" which is a bit ironic since I find it easier to find suitable hardware today than it was 30 years ago. Our experience seems to differ, I now run Trisquel and Guix on many of my home and machines and servers. For my uses they all work without non-free firmware. You have to be careful about what hardware you buy, and chose your use-cases. And, yes, I use modern hardware -- i9-14900K on desktop, i7 1260P and Ultra 155H in my two most used laptops, ARS-111M-NR and Talos II on the server side, as well as a bunch of aging Dell R630's. I fully understand if people who work on debian-installer and installer images don't want to spend time on supporting fully free images. I don't envy that task, and many thanks for what has been achieved! My request is not so much about asking them to break their shoulders with more heavy lifting, but for the project as a whole to not drive away folks with statements of the effect that a fully free Debian is no longer a project goal. My perception is that people are not ready to reconsider their positions, and that the vote gave a clear message, but I may be wrong. /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
