I can see your point about moving to Debian, and am largely inclined to agree
with you. That said, there is already the free software distro gNewSense
based on Debian, which I haven't tried, so I'm not sure it would be necessary
to switch bases.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but it seems like a fair point. The
thing that I found most exciting about Trisquel on first trying it was how it
had most of the software I needed. That said, I do think presentation is
important too, in particular not shifting towards touch-oriented WMs (e.g.
Gnome 3 default)
Although I understand your point, I also feel as the risk in compromising is
one that must be carefully assessed.
As for firmware, the principle source of pain is not actually the fact that
only free ones are installed by default, but a bug in Linux-Libre whereby the
cleaning scripts strip the names of all blobs, making it impossible to
install them. Fixing this would be beneficial. However, an OS installer
adding proprietary firmware as it sees fit is not a good idea. For example,
my current Fedora installation added firmware for my proprietary Wi-Fi card.
This is what I need at present, but what if I had a libre USB Wi-Fi adapter?
The system Debian employs is ideal, I think.
With alternative repositories, I don't think there is anything inherently
wrong with what Debian does (as you state). However, I still don't believe
they should be entirely in the clear because the default distribution ISN'T
entirely free. Although everything included is libre-licensed, (I am
reasonably certain) the documentation and information provided about the
distro references non-free software without flagging it as such. This means
it isn't entirely suitable for certification, as it doesn't have any system
in place to ensure uninitiated users are aware of what they get themselves
into when the add (say) the non-free repo to get Adobe Reader.
As such, I think you have a valid point, but:
A better system of classification, perhaps, would be "Acceptable for
everyone", "Acceptable for freedom-savvy users", and "Unacceptable".
Although it isn't quite what you're looking for, the document at
https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html does effectively act as
distinguishing the two classes you listed.
