On 24.03.2011 19:35, Romain d'Alverny wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 17:45, Michael Scherer <[email protected]> wrote: >> But my issue is not about non-free firmwares and those who use them or >> not, but about the gradual move to non-free packages on the free dvd iso >> ( http://netsplit.com/2006/11/27/slippery-slopes/ ). >> >> When I started at Mandrake Linux, there was no non-free repository. Then >> one day, non-free was created, and then soon, it was activated by >> default for the free version. Then I opened this bug, >> https://qa.mandriva.com/show_bug.cgi?id=40033 , who took 2 years to be >> fixed. And what I just see is yet another push to bury a little bit more >> values I care. > > Please be more explicit about the values here then. So far I don't see > no push. We're discussing this. Speaking of values, is this going > against the project values and announcement so far? (even in a > slippery way) > > Obviously, the very imperfect nature of free/non-free semantics does > not help at all here. > > Summary (from http://mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?id=licensing_policy): > * core: stuff that is not Free/Open Source according to OSI/FSF does > not belong here. Not even closed-source stuff that we can > redistribute. So if there is at this time, that's something to fix.
Most of files in kernel-firmware (which is in core) are not OSI/FSF free (approximate list from 2010 [1]). There was a short thread about that [2] where I asked the question if they should be moved to non-free due to them not being OSI/FSF free, and tmb agreed, while pterjan disagreed (saying BSD without source code (where a portion of the firmware files in question fall) is eligible for core). [1] http://lists.mandriva.com/cooker/2010-01/msg00525.php [2] https://mageia.org/pipermail/mageia-dev/20110115/002172.html > * nonfree: what does not qualify for core that we can still > redistribute; includes closed-source, proprietary, binaries and blobs. > * tainted: what could be in core or nonfree but bears more risks > (software patents, most likely for now). > > Now, for what we distribute in printed medias (DVD/CD for now), the > initial point was to provide some necessary bits from nonfree along > with core so that a local install can work with some specific hardware > (network, video). > > That does not prevent from shipping CD/DVD that only bear core on it I > believe? (what we used to do with Free at MDV). > > And that does not prevent from shipping too CD/DVD that bears more > than that (stuff located in nonfree), to ease setup for some users (or > even make a LiveCD usable). > > Is there a problem here? which one? -- Anssi Hannula
