• An appeal to d-i devs for software freedom

    From Russell Hernandez Ruiz@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 31 14:40:01 2023
    Dear debian-installer developers,

    I feel the need to begin this message by stating what it is NOT. This message is
    NOT meant to contest the decision to include non-free firmware in the installer.
    This post concerns UI.

    Primary proposal: that the priority of the question concerning non-free-firmware
    in the installer be changed from "low" to "high".

    The current situation is that debian.org proudly states "Debian is a complete Free Operating System!" with a big Download link. That link then serves the user
    an installer of Debian+proprietary firmware. That installer then proceeds to install the proprietary firmware **without prompting.** Many of us do not find this acceptable.

    However, I was able to confirm in IRC that the installer in fact already has the
    ability to prompt about non-free firmware (the repository, wholesale), if only the user chose to "expertly" configure their system.

    User "cheapie" on IRC reports that he "keeps running into users over and over again who seem to /not/ want firmware packages installed," and because of that, "would personally prefer for the priority to be high."

    Other users are also puzzled why Debian /seems/ to have decided to only allow rejecting the non-free components via the even more expert, hardly documented, boot flag mechanism.

    I suggest that it is not an "expert" decision to choose freedom. The user downloaded what loudly purports to be Free Software, so they ought to be offered
    a choice to get that. Furthermore, it's just the right thing to do, for their freedom's sake.

    Please increase the priority, from "low" to "high", of the the non-free-firmware
    installer question.

    ---

    Secondary proposal: improve the description of the non-free-firmware question.

    Currently it is worded thusly:

    Some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. Though this firmware
    is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used to install it. This firmware has varying licenses which may prevent you from using, modifying, or sharing it.

    Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

    Use non-free firmware?

    I suggest the following wording:

    Some computer parts require that users install programs on them in order to function fully or at all. For example, some Wi-Fi cards and audio chipsets may
    not function without them. This type of program is called "firmware".

    Although not at all part of Debian, some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. This firmware has varying licenses which restrict your freedoms to use, modify, or share the software, and generally does not have source forms that you may study
  • From Russell Hernandez Ruiz@21:1/5 to Geert Stappers on Sun Dec 31 16:30:02 2023
    On Sun, 2023-12-31 at 16:13 +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
    Convert that into a patch and/or merge request.


    I would have loved for that to be in the first, but I lack knowledge;
    would you kindly point me to where this is controlled? Then I am
    confident I could do it.

    Groeten
    Geert Stappers
    Yes, it is me

    Ha, Geert Stappers! 😳 Let's make this happen :)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Geert Stappers@21:1/5 to Russell Hernandez Ruiz on Sun Dec 31 16:20:01 2023
    On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 06:59:55AM -0600, Russell Hernandez Ruiz wrote:
    Dear debian-installer developers,

    Hi Russell,
    Hi Others,


    I feel the need to begin this message by stating what it is NOT. This message is
    NOT meant to contest the decision to include non-free firmware in the installer.
    This post concerns UI.

    Primary proposal: that the priority of the question concerning non-free-firmware
    in the installer be changed from "low" to "high".

    The current situation is that debian.org proudly states "Debian is a complete Free Operating System!" with a big Download link. That link then serves the user
    an installer of Debian+proprietary firmware. That installer then proceeds to install the proprietary firmware **without prompting.** Many of us do not find
    this acceptable.

    However, I was able to confirm in IRC that the installer in fact already has the
    ability to prompt about non-free firmware (the repository, wholesale), if only
    the user chose to "expertly" configure their system.

    User "cheapie" on IRC reports that he "keeps running into users over and over again who seem to /not/ want firmware packages installed," and because of that,
    "would personally prefer for the priority to be high."

    Other users are also puzzled why Debian /seems/ to have decided to only allow rejecting the non-free components via the even more expert, hardly documented,
    boot flag mechanism.

    I suggest that it is not an "expert" decision to choose freedom. The user downloaded what loudly purports to be Free Software, so they ought to be offered
    a choice to get that. Furthermore, it's just the right thing to do, for their freedom's sake.

    Please increase the priority, from "low" to "high", of the the non-free-firmware
    installer question.


    Convert that into a patch and/or merge request.



    Secondary proposal: improve the description of the non-free-firmware question.

    Currently it is worded thusly:

    Some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. Though this firmware
    is not at all a part of Debian, standard Debian tools can be used to install
    it. This firmware has varying licenses which may prevent you from using, modifying, or sharing it.

    Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway.

    Use non-free firmware?

    I suggest the following wording:

    Some computer parts require that users install programs on them in order to function fully or at all. For example, some Wi-Fi cards and audio chipsets may
    not function without them. This type of program is called "firmware".

    Although not at all part of Debian, some non-free firmware has been made to work with Debian. This firmware has varying licenses which restrict your freedoms to use, modify, or share the software, and generally does not have source forms that you may study.

    Please choose whether you want to have it available anyway, and automatically
    installed according to your hardware.

    Use non-free firmware?

    Convert that into a patch and/or merge request.

    It is important for users to understand the purpose of firmware, and the concequence of selecting "Yes", to make an informed decision.


    True



    This letter is primarily concerned with the simple changes above, but I would like to document a good, relevant suggestion from IRC: to give a summary of the
    non-free programs, and a way to customize the list, so that, for example, I may
    consent to CPU microcode, but refuse to use the on-board network card. We understand, however, that this is a much more involved change.

    Kind regards,
    Russell Hernandez Ruiz


    Groeten
    Geert Stappers
    Yes, it is me
    --
    Silence is hard to parse

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Russell Hernandez Ruiz@21:1/5 to Russell Hernandez Ruiz on Sun Dec 31 17:10:01 2023
    On Sun, 2023-12-31 at 09:26 -0600, Russell Hernandez Ruiz wrote:
    would you kindly point me to where this is controlled?

    It appears that the answer is: https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/apt-setup

    Handy-dandy https://codesearch.debian.net gives this as the sole match.

    I am writing the changes.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Geert Stappers@21:1/5 to Russell Hernandez Ruiz on Sun Dec 31 17:50:01 2023
    On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 09:26:42AM -0600, Russell Hernandez Ruiz wrote:
    On Sun, 2023-12-31 at 16:13 +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
    Convert that into a patch and/or merge request.


    I would have loved for that to be in the first, but I lack knowledge;
    would you kindly point me to where this is controlled? Then I am
    confident I could do it.

    Groeten
    Geert Stappers
    Yes, it is me

    Ha, Geert Stappers! 😳 Let's make this happen :)


    Poke me saturday 13 january


    Groeten
    Geert Stappers
    --
    Silence is hard to parse

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Russell Hernandez Ruiz@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 31 18:00:01 2023
    Submitted merge requests
    here
    https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/apt-setup/-/merge_requests/14
    and here
    https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/apt-setup/-/merge_requests/15

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Russell Hernandez Ruiz@21:1/5 to Geert Stappers on Sun Dec 31 18:00:01 2023
    On Sun, 2023-12-31 at 17:45 +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:


    Poke me saturday 13 january


    I cannot; does not seem appropriate for a Sabbath.
    Also, that is my birthday.

    But I can poke the day after. I'll put it on my calendar.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Geert Stappers@21:1/5 to Russell Hernandez Ruiz on Sun Jan 14 11:50:02 2024
    On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 10:55:06AM -0600, Russell Hernandez Ruiz wrote:
    Submitted merge requests
    here
    https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/apt-setup/-/merge_requests/14

    I have seen the request for further help.


    and here https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/apt-setup/-/merge_requests/15


    Updated with "What is blocking the merge request?"



    Groeten
    Geert Stappers
    --
    Silence is hard to parse

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)