D.J.J. Ring, Jr., wrote: > What I was talking about is that Debian refuses to change it's policy > of non-free,
Ok. That indeed happens to be non-negociable. That goes back to the #1 item of the social contract of Debian: “Debian will remain 100% free”. But also there you can find “Works that do not meet our free software standards”, which translates to the availability of the non-free firmwares image. D.J.J. Ring, Jr., wrote: > meaning that a CD of Debian with today's computers, especially today's > laptops is nearly useless. Yes, but on a political point of view, the problem is on the hardware side, not the software side: the manufacturer sold you hardware that cannot work without non-free firmware. Surely, pragmatically speaking you'll want to use the firmware CD. It happens to be available, what is the actual concern? D.J.J. Ring, Jr., wrote: > We have to wait for a unofficial non-free Net Install CD You do not have to wait long :) http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-including-firmware/11.0.0+nonfree/amd64/iso-cd/ shows that it was available on 2021-08-14 14:00 UTC. To be compared with http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/release/11.0.0/amd64/iso-cd/ which was available on 2021-08-14 13:51 UTC. I.e. they were basically generated one after the other by the same build script. D.J.J. Ring, Jr., wrote: > it would be lots easier for Debian to adapt to modern life. Embracing non-free "modern" software is easy, yes. "The dark side is easier", yes. That doesn't mean that on the long run that's what we want. That discussion is really not about debian-accessibility actually, and it was already discussed at terrible length, so yes that won't change, I could only summarize the idea above. D.J.J. Ring, Jr., wrote: > I don't know if the actual official release works, but the non-free > firmware release doesn't work, Both do work all the same in my tests. (with hardware that doesn't require non-free firmware, that is) D.J.J. Ring, Jr., wrote: > I didn't know that the Debian Accessibility was only one person, It isn't only one person in the Debian Accessibility workforce fortunately :) But on the debian-installer side I'm rather alone indeed. And we are not that many in Debian Accessibility. The point I wanted to make is that while the "shaming" approach can be effective on big companies such as Microsoft/Apple/Google/etc., I have never seen it effective on benevolent-based teams. D.J.J. Ring, Jr., wrote: > What was send had ">Samuel" from an old message and I don't want > anyone to think I am impersonating Samuel. No problem :) Samuel
