[Fsf-Debian] Silent here

[Paul van der Vlis]

Hi Didier,

Op 23-11-12 15:22, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud schreef:
> Hi Paul,
> 
> Le mercredi, 21 novembre 2012 14.39:02, Paul van der Vlis a écrit :
>> Very silent here.
>>
>> In my opinion it's not a good idea to make Debian FSF-free at the
>> moment. But what we should do is to make Debian "almost FSF-free" and
>> make some steps in the good direction.
>>
>> In my opinion we could do the following:
>>
>> 1. Move the non-free and the contrib repository from the debian.org
>> domain to another domain name, under control of DD's.
> 
> Given our Social Contract, paragraph 5 [SC5]:
> 
> "      We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of works that
>        do not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. We have
>        created "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our archive for these
>        works. The packages in these areas are not part of the Debian
>        system, although they have been configured for use with Debian."
> 
> I would argue that moving "contrib" and "non-free" out of Debian 
> infrastructure would need a Social Contract amendment, thereby a GR.
> 
> (If you read it to the letter, it could not be strictly needed, as one could 
> read "we have created … in our archive" as a historical fact more than a 
> binding point. Yet I think such a change has to go through the body of 
> developers).

When we create an archive at another domain name as debian.org (e.g. on
non-free.org), why isn't it "our archive"?

But no problem with a general resolution.

>> 2. Change the installer in a manner that no non-free firmware is advised
>> anymore, but that you still can use it.
> 
> … besides on hardware where you can't.

What I mean is that the installer offers a way to use non-free firmware,
but it just not advices it.

> We currently have both documentation and code that permit one user that 
> chooses so to use firmwares (e.g.). Removing both these is IMHO controversial 
> and should probably also go through a GR.
> 
> The "firmware" question is also a slightly different one than the whole "non-
> free" problem: some firmwares are as freely distributed as CPU microcode, 
> where the latter is an absolute requirement to have an OS run. My feeling here 
> is that there ''might'' be consensus around making a new "firmware" archive 
> area, specifically for pieces of code not executed by CPUs but needed to make 
> them run.
> 
>> 3. Remove recommendations or suggestions to non-free software in packages.
> 
> See the tech-ctte discussion: http://bugs.debian.org/681419 From the non-
> debated part of the statement: 
> 
> "	The Debian Policy Manual states (§2.2.1) that packages in main
>      "must not require or recommend a package outside of main for
>      compilation or execution".  Both "Depends: package-in-non-free" and
>      "Recommends: package-in-non-free" clearly violate this requirement."
> 
> So these issues are serious bugs already. For part not addresses by the tech-
> ctte bug, I think you won't find consensus to drop non-free Suggests.

I think most people will not have big problems with it, suggestions are
not really important in my opinion.

>> What we cannot do at the moment is remove non-free and contrib
>> completely, and we also cannot remove all documentation about non-free
>> software and firmware.
> 
> I think even moving them out of debian.org realm would need a GR, both because 
> it's IMHO a change of our foundation documents and because it's a sufficiently 
> important change to warrant an explicit (n)ack from the body of developers.
> 
> (And that's without talking about the infrastructure changes to make it clear 
> on the Debian side while the mirrors (that are not all under our 
> responsibility), will keep on putting main/contrib/non-free contents on the 
> same harddisks, making the whole exercise quite moot IMHO.)

True, it will be work.

And maybe non-free and contrib will have not the same nice
infrastructure as debian.org has.

With regards,
Paul van der Vlis.




-- 
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer, Groningen
http://www.vandervlis.nl