On 24.03.2011 14:41, Wolfgang Bornath wrote: > 2011/3/24 Anssi Hannula <anssi.hann...@iki.fi>: >> On 24.03.2011 12:39, Wolfgang Bornath wrote: >>> But I don't think it would be a good idea to include non-free contents >>> in the distribution ISOs at all. That this assumed majority does not >>> care about the issue does not mean we should not care either. We >>> should rather stress the point. >> >> Note that the current Alpha2 ISO contains many non-free [1] firmware >> files, and without those e.g. many popular wired NICs do not work, and >> the 3D acceleration of ATI *free* driver depends on those. >> >> [1] Depending on the definition - some are BSD/similar but still without >> source code, so considered non-free by OSI/FSF/Debian. > > Good point. In this discussion we were too vague about this. > As I see this the discussion so far was about "non-free" software, > where "non-free" meant the software in the non-free repos, not the > strict definition of "free" by FSF. > Prominent example (and trigger of this discussion): WiFi driver/firmware.
Well, currently the firmware are assigned between non-free and core at random (yes, we have non-free firmware in core, and yes, there are GPL firmware in non-free, etc), so... -- Anssi Hannula