On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > You're fine with one level of injustice. I'm fine with another level of > injustice. Both compromise the freedoms that Fedora currently gives you. I'm not fine with it. It's an unfortunate situation too. But producing a single special case trivial display program for users who couldn't run anything which was truly free at all is hardly comparable to cryptographically locking down the core of an OS— millions of lines of code written by other people, and missing an opportunity to help users regain their complete freedom at a time when they are most ready and willing to accept a little inconvenience. You've made the argument that we didn't choose the lockdown the systems— Microsoft and the OEMs have. Fine. But it is we who will be choosing to restrict Fedora in that environment rather than only a trivial help-text shim. I gave extensive argument on several aspect of the balance which I believe fall in favor not adopting cryptographic lockdown in Fedora. I'm not opposing cryptographically locking the kernel on a simple blind principle of software freedom, and so I do not reject the alternative of a help screen for equally weak reasons. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
