On 10/15/16, mdn <bernardl...@openmailbox.org> wrote:
> Debian's approach of this isn't really ethical.

 they're doing the best that they believe they can do, but they _have_
been told.  see joey hess's very public description of the Debian
Charter as a "toxic document".

 i've spoken to the FSF about this: from what i gather, the changes
required are actually very very simple: all they have to do is add in
a simple popup message whenever someone clicks the "nonfree" section,
issuing a warning to the end-user that the consequences of their
actions are leading them into unethical territory.

 ... how simple would that be to add?

the other parts (creating separate DNS names and different
repositories for the nonfree sections) could be done transparently
with HTTP rewrites and redirects (just like devuan seems to be doing)
as an interim measure, then removed at some appropriate point after a
couple of major releases.

it's really, really not very hard, and we'd end up with Debian - one
of the world's leading Software Libre OSes - being RYF Compliant.

as it is, we have to fuck around forking tens of THOUSANDs of
packages, with efforts to do so failing under the sheer weight of the
task and the required resources.

i really really wish the debian group would wake up, just a little bit.

*sigh*.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Reply via email to