Quoting Simon Richter (2022-08-26 15:01:41) > IMO: Both installers should be on the same download page, with a brief > explanation on who should select which (like we used to have in package > descriptions), and possibly a longer page explaining this in more detail. [...] > Key design points: > > - two columns, side-by-side > - avoiding the word "official" completely > - the DFSG and DSC have a prominent place and are set in contrast with > the non-free images [...]
> I'm not entirely sure what this would translate to in GR terms, probably > something along the lines of > > --- > Debian recognizes that some modern hardware requires firmware components > that do not fulfill the DFSG, and that these may be needed at > installation time. As our priorities are our users, and free software, > we provide an installer image that includes these components, and inform > users that these, like the "non-free" archive component, are not covered > by the Debian Social Contract and provided on a best-effort basis. > --- > > This, IMO, resolves the conflict with the DSC by clarifying that we are > making an exception here and why, and highlights that we still do not > believe our users' needs are or can be adequately met by non-free software. Thanks a lot, Simon. I would vote for a proposal like the above. What I mean by that is (not that I think we should all post "me too" posts here but) since I have strongly ben in favor of using "offficial" label to indicate what we as project can support, I agree that this is an approach that abandons such label yet ensures explicitly in the text we vote on that "non-free" will be clearly communicated to our users. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
