Good riddance, ESR

[Rahul Sundaram]

Alexandre Oliva wrote:

> I assumed people would take the hint and follow the first link, to
> read about it, since this is a follow up.  I've now hinted at it more
> strongly, and provided a short intuitive definition.  Does this make
> it clear enough?

Yes. It does.

> 
> If not, what paragraph's last couple of sentences don't make sense to
> you?  (or by 'paragraph' do you mean 'section'?)

"Fedora and Ubuntu have both revisited their policies about inclusion of 
non-Free firmware in their distributions, even though no actual policy 
changes were made at this time."

We made no policy changes at all in Fedora. I am not aware of what 
changes were made in Ubuntu regarding firmware either. Perhaps 
references would be useful to understand what you are talking about. 
Earlier there werent many packages that met our licensing guidelines for 
firmware (ie) at the base minimum, it should be redistributable and 
those that were had licenses which required some legal 
review/clarifications. So now that we have some potential candidates, we 
are looking at including those packages. These are firmware for wireless 
cards. So we cant do something like codec buddy here since folks 
probably would require the firmware to get to a net connection in the 
first place. Catch 22.

Rahul