Re: Changing how we handle non-free firmware

[Timo Lindfors <timo.lindfors@iki.fi>]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> I'm proposing to change how we handle non-free firmware in
> Debian. I've written about this a few times already this year [1, 2]
> and I ran a session on the subject at DebConf [3].

Thanks for working on this somewhat controversial topic. I haven't spend 
that much time thinking about the issue yet but perhaps the following 
steps could help make this less controversial:

1) As it is pretty impossible to write a clear definition of
   firmware, we should require packages in non-free-firmware to clearly
   explain where the code will get executed to allow people to make
   informed decisions. Some people are more ok with having code run on
   an external device than on the main CPU.

2) Ensure that the installer will inform users about non-free-firmware
   packages that are about to be installed and possibly also allow the
   user to see their full description.

3) Ensure that the filename of the installation media includes
   "non-free-firmware" or something similar so that it is clear to
   everyone what they are getting into. Debian has had such a long
   history of not including non-free bits in the installation image
   that people will definitely be surprised if the filename does not
   reflect this change.

4) If at all possible, keep the fully free installation media available as
   was already suggested earlier.

-Timo