Infinite Freedom??? -- segment them in the RPM hierarchy (but that's all)

[Bryan J. Smith]

On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 23:07 -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> I think it is past due for Fedora to take at least a half-step and
> segregate the non-free firmware into separate packages which can be
> excluded at install time.
> Doing so will not win Fedora any credit from the FSF, but it will do
> nothing to harm the standing hardware compatibility and it will enable
> those who care and who want to avoid that hardware to do so.
> Increasing awareness is good for everyone.

I'm not a big fan of these meta-discussions and debates.  They sign-up
developers with all sorts of non-sense that really doesn't do much for
anyone.

However, this is about the only statement I agree with in part.  To
refine it, I would state ...

"Fedora's board should _consider_ mandating the segmentation of key,
100% redistributable, but non-free[dom] components into their own
portion of the 3-tier RPM hierarchy.  And if and when that mandate comes
through, it's up to the board to set what release's development this
will affect going forward."

As far as adding an option to checkbox "exclude" all non-free[dom]
components, I'll leave it to the Anaconda, YUM, et. al. maintainers to
discuss the technical feasibility of such.  Frankly, I think just
segmenting those components into a Non-Free tier in the RPM hierarchy
would do everything needed.  Debian does this fairly well (although far
from perfect).

Since they are still 100% redistributable, that solves the
indemnification issues, which should _always_ be the focus of Fedora
IMPO.  Things that aren't should be, for the same reason.

> Really, I think it's quite unfortunate that the 'most free'/FSF
> approved' distro is based on Ubuntu... a distribution which hasn't a
> fraction of Fedora's commitment to freedom. .. but it is what it is.

Some would and could take issue with certain aspects around the distro
though.  Others would argue Debian is just as good, and possibly even
better in many regards.  It all depends on the definition/context.

But that just goes to my point, if people want to find something alleged
"wrong" or "impure" around about any community endeavor, they will --
and utterly miss the real fact that there is a community that cares,
despite the non-sense.

As long as Fedora keeps its focus, as it has in the past, not only
consumers but, more importantly, consumers with influence in major
corporations continue to be able to deploy Fedora or even roll out
Fedora-based solutions -- without any legal issues.  That's unlike a lot
of distros -- and the reason why Red Hat Linux (as well as Debian) have
always been very popular.

-- Bryan

P.S.  Congrats to the Fedora team for putting forth the efforts that
have now allowed Red Hat to reach level 4 in the Common Criteria with
RBAC and other capabilities.  People have been lambasting SELinux, and
Red Hat, for a long time.  But it's the community efforts, like those in
Fedora, that made it largely possible.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith         Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
        Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution