inamerrata

A couple of comments on the ongoing votes.

The DFSG/firmware issue is a complicated one. For the votes that we’ve currently got open, I’m voting for futher discussion in favour of the DFSG#2 clarification — not because I disagree with requiring source code for all works in principle, but because I think we should be making sure we can make Debian work with full source for everything first, before issuing position statements about it; and I’m voting for “release etch even with kernel firmware issues” above further discussion and “special exception to DFSG#2 for firmware” below further discussion, because I don’t think we can handle the broader issue before etch, and I don’t think it’s a good idea to try to tie the exception to the non-existance of technical measures directly. I’m not really sure that’s a good enough reason to vote that option below further discussion, so I might change my vote on that yet.

There have been quite a few other proposals on the topic, including one from me that didn’t get sufficient seconds to be voted on, another from Frans Pop that was withdrawn due to procedural issues, a couple more from Sven Luther, and a new proposal from Sven and supported by the kernel team that’s a further refinement on the “release etch even with firmware issues” resolution currently being voted on.

I personally think we should spend some time after etch thinking a bit more deeply about this stuff. Personally, I think we should insist on source for everything, but that also means we need to have a clear explanation on why it’s good — even for firmware and font files and music and artwork — and it means we’re going to need to make sure we have a reasonable way of distributing it, and it means we’re going to have to make sure that we have a good way of distributing stuff that doesn’t meet our standards but that users still need or want; whether that’s drivers they need to do installation or get good graphics performance, documentation for their software, or whatever else. There’s a lot of real improvements we could make there — both in making the core of Debian more free and more useful, and making it easier for users who want to make compromises to choose what they want to compromise on and what they don’t want to compromise on. I really hope that once etch is done and dusted quite a few of those sorts of improvements will get done, both in technical improvements in Debian, and in good advocacy from Debian and other groups towards people who aren’t already making things as free as they potentially could be.

One the recall issue, I would have preferred to vote “re-affirm”, then “recall”, then “further discussion”, to say “I don’t think this creates a conflict of interest that can’t be handled, but I’ve no objection if other people think it does”. But since that isn’t what the ballot(s) turned out to be, I’ve voted “re-affirm” above further discussion on that ballot, and “recall” below further discussion on the other ballot.

I’ve voted the “wish success” option above “don’t endorse/support” option for two reasons — first, because the “wish success” resolution actually refers to “projects funding Debian or helping towards the release of Etch” in general, while the “don’t endorse/support” proposal specifically talks about projects I’m involved in (including non-Dunc-Tank projects) which seems kind of personal. There’s also the fact that I’d rather see more success and mutual support in the Debian community, even for projects I don’t personally like, than less. I originally voted the “don’t endorse/support” option below further discussion for those reasons, but then decided that that was silly — just as I would have been happy to vote for the recall above further discussion, it’s not really that big a deal either way, and fundamentally I think both options are essentially the same anyway: that any potential conflict of interest can be dealt with, and Debian and Dunc-Tank are fundamentally different projects. I was probably influenced in that a fair bit by the “not endorse/support” option being proposed and seconded mostly by people who actively oppose the idea, including Josselin Mouette, Samuel Hocevar, Pierre Habouzit and Aurélien Jarno.

But in the end, the outcome’s fine any which way — some people will continue disagreeing with the concept, others will agree with it, and everyone can keep contributing to Debian in whatever way they think’s best whatever the outcome. And like I said when running for DPL this year, while you are a lot more visible as DPL, it’s not actually that necessary to be DPL to get things done in Debian.