Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware

2022-09-04 Thread Richard Laager
On 9/4/22 14:38, Kurt Roeckx wrote: I'm not sure that a GR should say what the interpretation of a document should be. I really prefer that the document is changed instead so that it's more clear on what it says. I agree with "prefer", but I can't bring myself to say "require [amendment]" or "

Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware

2022-09-04 Thread Paul Wise
On Wed, 2022-08-24 at 09:21 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Tue, 2022-08-23 at 19:57 +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: > > > My reading of that is that the FSF RYF program does not meet the needs > > of people who do not care about having a fully free software system. > > My reading of it was the opposi

Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware

2022-09-04 Thread Richard Laager
On 9/4/22 14:38, Kurt Roeckx wrote: Please note that the current discussion period ends the 7th, the maximum discussion period is the 8th, which probably means I'll start the vote the 9th or the 10th, and I think we're not actually going to be ready to have all options like we want them by then.

Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware

2022-09-04 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 09:57:45AM +0200, Tobias Frost wrote: > Hi Steve, > > On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 09:14:53PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 03:11:25PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote: > > > > > > > I like to discussion about anything related to this, so that I can at > > >

Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware

2022-09-04 Thread Tobias Frost
Hi Steve, On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 09:14:53PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 03:11:25PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote: > > > > > I like to discussion about anything related to this, so that I can at > > > least get an idea what the consensus is. > > > > DSC 1 and DSC 5 have som