Hans de Goede wrote:
If I get Alex correctly he is saying that, to his goal, which is 100%
Free software everywhere (including in his toothbrush), this is
counterproductive, as it may make it easier to distribute binary
firmware along with the kernel, as it now could be put in a seperate
tarbal removing GPL worries etc.
As much as I admire Alex's goal's I'm very glad with the current
pragmatic approach Fedora has taken with regards to firmware.
And when combining both these perspectives, David, you patch is
excellent and I'm very gratefull for all the work you've been doing on it.
If the firmware truely gets put in a different tarbal (and thus
eventually in a different srpm), then it will be feasible to do a no
blobs included Fedora spin like gnewsense, which would be great.
If you have to do a *SEPARATE* spin to do a free CD, why does the Fedora
project spew crap like this everywhere:
"We try to always do the right thing, and provide only free and open source
software." [1]
It's simply not true and the author of that (Rahul Sundaram I think--he writes
it everywhere else too), *MUST* know that isn't true. It's one thing if the
non-free software that fedora shipped was considered a bug that just hasn't
been eradicated but shipping non-free software is fedora *policy*.[1]
It's one thing to include some firmware, call a program GPL when it's not, ship
non-free binaries etc., but at least don't lie about it on all your literature.
Sheez.
-Jeff
[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview
[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/FirmWare geez, you even have a special
interest group in complete conflict with your supposed mission
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
