On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 03:57:01PM +0200, Tobias Frost wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 07:39:21AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: > > Ansgar <[email protected]> writes: > > > > > On Fri, 2022-08-19 at 16:23 +0200, Simon Richter wrote: > > >> Do we need to update the Debian Social Contract for that? > > >> Specifically paragraph 1, which currently reads > > >> > > >> Debian will remain 100% free > > > > > > No. Just like we don't need to update the Debian Social Contract for > > > having https://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free/: we just ship > > > additional files that might be useful for people having specific > > > hardware. > > > > I disagree -- what is being proposed here is to replace our current > > DSC-compatible free software installer images with non-free. That goes > > significantly further than what the spirit of DSC§5 suggests. > > It not being replaced; there are just additional bits in there which > help people to actually be able to install Debian on some modern machines.
"All non-free bits are equal but some are more equal than other." Let's face it, when we would start including non-free bits in the installer, then the installer is no longer free. Regardless of whether those bits get installed. > > The guarantee in SC1 that we will never *require* those non-free bits, as > writen > out in "We will never make the system require the use of a non-free > component." > This GR does not violate this promise. With this GR proposal there would no longer be an installer without those non-free bits. > > > -- > tobi's 0.02 € --
