On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 06:48:16PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 05:47:58PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > Though, when this software is central to all Debian (as the kernel is, > > or the glibc for the sunrpc issue, or mesa for the GLX code, or ...), > > then as it's a long and slow work to either prune the firmware, or deal > > with the copyright holders to relicense (and mesa has made it, proof > > that it's possible, but it needed like 2 or 3 releases of Debian to do > > so !), the Release team acknowledge that progress has been made, and > > tags the bugs $suite-ignore. > > So, I take it you will vote "Further discussion". > > > > At this time (and I believe, in part due to historical reasons), the > > > release > > > team has made it clear that it is not their responsibility to enforce the > > > SC. > > > > Why on earth should it be the Release Team ? It's everyone's. > > Then I guess you'll like that my proposal has two options that move the > problem > away from the Release Team. > > > Your proposal misses the point. DFSG wrt firmwares is a hard issue, and > > your black-and-white vision of it isn't adapted. The 60-days or move the > > package to non-free would move the glibc and portmap as is to non-free. > > Good luck with that. (Just to show how impractical it is). > > You haven't proven that it is, you only assert it. Discussing whether it is > or not is off-topic here. If you think so strongly this way, there are two > options in my proposal to exclude Lenny for firmware, and you could also > propose another GR to remove SC #1 (good luck). > > > * firmwares are part of the hardware, even your CPU has microcode. > > The combination of firmware and driver can perfectly constitue a "derived > work", but that's not the point. The question is that we're promising the > contents of linux-2.6 package are 100% free. > > > You > > don't have the source code that generated the circuits of that > > hardware, > > The circuits of my hardware have nothing to do with the Social Contract. > > > [...]. Here you could modify source, > > big deal, you won't be able to *build* the damn firmware. ever. > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=502508 > > And if there are no tools, we just drop the driver untill someone's willing to > add a /lib/firmware/ blob loader. Which will no doubt be done really soon by > anyone who's actually interested in supporting non-free stuff (unlike myself). >
| 4. Our priorities are our users and free software | We will be guided by *the needs of our users* and the free software | community. We will place their interests *first in our priorities*. We | will support the needs of our users for operation in many different | kinds of computing environments. [...] Dropping support for already supported hardware more likely violate SC#4. Moving the firmware to /lib/firmware/ doesn't. -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
