On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:17:27 +0200 (SAST) Buchan Milne <[email protected]> wrote:
> > ----- "andre999" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > ok. > > My though was essentially that firmware is so close to hardware > > that its > > actual free/non-free status shouldn't apply - we should treat > > it like > > > > (almost) part of the hardware. > > I would agree, but some people wouldn't. > > > As for the drivers, a little more distant from the hardware, > > they could > > be in non-free, but I sincerely think that they should be on > > all installation isos. > > I wouldn't say "all". > > > That is, on installing from an iso, all hardware-related > > functions should (ideally) be fully functional, even if it > > requires using non-free > > drivers. > > IMHO, not without informing the user, so that they have the > choice (e.g. to consider replacing the hardware by something > supported by free software => supporting vendors who support free > software). > > > The lack of some drivers (or components of drivers) can render a > > system > > technically functional, but with important dysfunctions, simply > > because > > the required drivers were not available on installation. > > That should not happen. > > IMHO, that is not *our* choice to make for the user. > > > The kernel, firmware and drivers, built on the hardware, > > provide a platform on which the application software runs. > > True, it is better if drivers are open source, but in my view, > > it is application software where open source is the most > > important. > > But, that is *your* view. > > IMHO, some of these questions should be posed to the community. > > For example, maybe we should brand ISO releases as something like > "Mageia Libre" and "Mageia Gratis" (note, not a "Mageia" and > "Mageia limited" or similar, give equal standing to both > releases), where Libre would include no non-free software of any > kind on the media, users using Libre would never be prompted > about non-free software (without opting in, by e.g. installing a > different release package). Gratis would include non-free > software/firmware required to enable hardware or specific > hardware features. > > I think it may be worthwhile catering to users who would like to > follow FSF Free distribution guidelines as closely as possible, > by providing a release that is as close as practically possible > to these guidelines (but still making it possible for pragmatic > users to have a good experience). > > Regards, > Buchan I particularly like the proposed use of the terms Libre and Gratis. My main concern is that newbie Mageia users - those who come direct from Windows, rather than from another variety of Linux - might abandon the installation when asked to opt in (or out) of anything marked 'non-free', mistakenly thinking that they will have to pay for it. -- Margot ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ **Otford Ducks Computers** We teach, you learn... ...and, if you don't do your homework, we set the cat on you! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
