On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 11:39:42AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Bart Martens dijo [Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 11:59:44AM +0200]: > > > > If you mean official media, this is more radical than Steve's proposal. > > > > It would permit arbitrary non-free packages as long as users were > > > > informed. > > > > > > > > If you mean unofficial media - that's the status quo. In which case, > > > > this option is the same as Simon's and none of the above. > > > > > > > > Ross > > > > > > > > > > /packages from the non-free *firmware* section/ > > > > My proposal does not add such new section ... > > Right. I would _oppose_ your proposal if it is to appear in the > ballot, because a freeness _win_ of Steve's proposal is that... People > that need to enable non-free firmware don't need to pull in all of > non-free in order to keep it updated. > > I often install packages for getting to know them, just because they > appeared in my list. And my list nowadays includes non-free because of > some firmware. So I have installed non-free software without > noticing. Splitting non-free firmware grants the user some more system > freeness guarantees.
My proposal does not forbid adding such new section. > > Greetings,
