On 05/31/2012 12:06 PM, Peter Jones wrote: > On 05/31/2012 12:04 PM, Gerry Reno wrote: >> SecureBoot is not about security. It is about restriction. > > If you're looking for a mantra to recite ad infinitum, that's a fine > one, but > right now we're looking for ideas that are helpful and productive > instead. > It's very difficult to have this conversation if all the points about the principles of freedom upon which Fedora was founded, operates on, and is known for, are simply swept under the rug because they've passed some threshold of inconvenience that is not immediately apparent. We understand there is a solution, right now, for the main project and its releases that is "workable". It's cost $99, assuming that the license will be granted (which it surely will be, at first, to spur adoption of TC). But there will likely come a time when this solution will not work, for whatever reasons (think, Red Hat and Microsoft get into a legal tussle, or some security breach is brought to light making it seem like Red Hat is unreliable to get their bootloader signed anymore). Then, Fedora is in the same boat as everyone else, and we're left with no solution. By facing the problem in the same way as others will be forced to, Fedora as a whole project will be encouraged to fight for a solution that is equally accessible to others, as it is to them. This is, from the outside, what would be the most fair, sustainable, and congruent with the principles that Fedora has, so far, attempted to maintain. I'm sorry if this doesn't sound as pragmatic as "we just make a deal with the devil, just this once, and work on a better, long-term solution later". Anything else I would like to say has already been said elsewhere, so I hope those arguments don't just get swept under the rug as well. -- Libre Video http://librevideo.org -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
