Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-05 Thread Simon McVittie
On Wed, 05 Oct 2022 at 16:34:27 +0200, Philip Hands wrote: > I didn't want to inflict work on the debian-cd > team, and I assume that nobody will object if volunteers turn up to help > build/test the free images. If they're built and tested, I'm pretty sure > they'll be published. As one of the pe

Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-05 Thread Philip Hands
Ian Jackson writes: > Russ Allbery writes ("Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results"): >> I don't think you can draw any meaningful conclusions from this ranking >> because of the concern that the latter option may have been ruled invalid >> by

Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-05 Thread Ian Jackson
Steve McIntyre writes ("Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results"): > On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 02:34:33PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > >Certainly given the narrow margin, we should do what we can to make it > >easy for those who want to provide an unofficial full

Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-05 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 02:34:33PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: >Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx writes ("General Resolution: non-free >firmware: results"): >> The results of the General Resolution about non-free firmware: >> Option 5 "Change SC for no

Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-05 Thread Ian Jackson
Russ Allbery writes ("Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results"): > I don't think you can draw any meaningful conclusions from this ranking > because of the concern that the latter option may have been ruled invalid > by the Project Secretary. I prefer one

Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-04 Thread Russ Allbery
Russ Allbery writes: > Ian Jackson writes: >> Certainly given the narrow margin, we should do what we can to make it >> easy for those who want to provide an unofficial fully-free installer >> to do so. I think we might even want to link to it from the official >> page, inverting the way we cur

Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-04 Thread Russ Allbery
Ian Jackson writes: > Observe also that "Recommend installer containing non-free firmware" > beat "Only one installer" by 12 votes. I don't think you can draw any meaningful conclusions from this ranking because of the concern that the latter option may have been ruled invalid by the Project Sec

Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-04 Thread nick black
Ian Jackson left as an exercise for the reader: > 6 votes is a very tight margin between "one installer" and "two > installers". for anyone not doing the work of producing and staging two installers, there was little real difference between these two options (less potential confusion was the other

Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-04 Thread Holger Levsen
On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 02:34:33PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Certainly given the narrow margin, we should do what we can to make it > easy for those who want to provide an unofficial fully-free installer > to do so. I think we might even want to link to it from the official > page, inverting the

General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-04 Thread Ian Jackson
Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx writes ("General Resolution: non-free firmware: results"): > The results of the General Resolution about non-free firmware: > Option 5 "Change SC for non-free firmware in installer, one installer" > > The details of the r

General Resolution: non-free firmware: results

2022-10-03 Thread Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx
Hi, The results of the General Resolution about non-free firmware: Option 5 "Change SC for non-free firmware in installer, one installer" The details of the results are available at: https://www.debian.org/vote/2022/vote_003 Kurt Roeckx Debian Project Secretary signature.asc Description: PGP

General Resolution: Non-free firmware: First call for votes

2022-09-17 Thread Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx
Hi, This is the first call for votes for the General Resolution about non-free firmware. Voting period starts 2022-09-18 00:00:00 UTC Votes must be received by 2022-10-01 23:59:59 UTC This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution. You may see the constitution

Re: General resolution: non-free firmware

2022-08-30 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 08:28:15PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: >Steve McIntyre dixit: > >>You've utterly missed Phil's point about people not seeing or hearing >>boot options. > >I didn’t. I pointed out that people can select different bootloader >options if their bootloader is already set up for

Re: General resolution: non-free firmware

2022-08-30 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Steve McIntyre dixit: >Please go and *read* and *respond* in debian-vote. The discussion is >there, not here. I wrote where the Reply-To pointed to. Perhaps if that had been correct… >You've utterly missed Phil's point about people not seeing or hearing >boot options. I didn’t. I pointed out th

Re: General resolution: non-free firmware

2022-08-27 Thread Phil Morrell
On Sun, Aug 28, 2022 at 12:56:43AM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx dixit: > > >it are available at: https://www.debian.org/vote/2022/vote_003 > > Is there support for something like A but not enabled by default? > That is, you have to actively select a nōn-d