5 ms·

Mixed and competing thoughts and emotions. On the one hand, I love that Debian was the community GNU/Linux that shipped with the ability to be 100% unencumbered

Mixed and competing thoughts and emotions. On the one hand, I love that Debian was the community GNU/Linux that shipped with the ability to be 100% unencumbered super easily. On the other hand, I feel like a system should be usable immediately with little effort if it is to be enjoyed and properly useful. Then there’s part of me screaming “tradition not trend” and another part of me is screaming back with “finally!” It would be nice if they made it optional within the installer I suppose. Maybe I’m just a crazy person.

zozbot234 4y ago
> On the one hand, I love that Debian was the community GNU/Linux that shipped with the ability to be 100% unencumbered super easily. There will probably be an "unofficial 100% free installer" for those who care about that. The SC change does not forbid that, it just says that what Debian publishes by default should not introduce obvious breakage on systems where providing non-free firmware is required for proper operation.
- nerdponx 4y ago
  Isn't that kind of what Ubuntu is for? Without major players in the community taking a hard line on free software, incentives to support freedom will become even lower than they currently are today.
  - eptcyka 4y ago
    Ubuntu is far more than a Debian fork nowadays - I think of the packages that are installed on most user systems, very little of them share the same source between Ubuntu and Debian.
jorvi 4y ago
> I feel like a system should be usable immediately with little effort if it is to be enjoyed and properly useful. More open source should think like this. I’ve been aggressively trying to get OpenWRT to ship the images with WiFi on by default. At this point 99.99% of people are not leaving their network unsecured, and if for some reason you have to reset the router it becomes a plastic brick unless you have an Ethernet cable and an USB-to-ethernet adapter nearby. Even suggestions of either creating a landing page that forces the user to set up security before allowing internet connectivity, or basing the WiFi password on the serial number (that is also on the back of any router) falls on deaf ears.
- tiffanyh 4y ago
  > At this point 99.99% of people are not leaving their network unsecured… 99.99% of people are doing what? Sorry, the double negative above is confusing me.
  - CompuHacker 4y ago
    I think they are suggesting that years of abuse hurled at the average user, coupled with legislation, have caused all new home networks to be secure, one way or the other.
    - rascul 4y ago
      There is regulation for that? I would be interested in finding out more.
- naasking 4y ago
  > I’ve been aggressively trying to get OpenWRT to ship the images with WiFi on by default With what password? Plenty of people won't configure things they don't have to and that's a huge security hole. I don't see the utility in this change frankly.
  - detaro 4y ago
    The comment you reply to both explains the utility and proposes ways of mitigating the "huge security hole".
    - naasking 4y ago
      So two clicks to turn on wifi that I can do from anywhere in my house is easier than digging my router out of my closet to write down and type in the serial number? This was supposed to be an idea that makes OpenWRT "usable immediately with little effort". This is not that.
      - 4y ago
nequo 4y ago
> It would be nice if they made it optional within the installer I suppose. Apparently this option lost by 6 votes: Option 5 "Change SC for non-free firmware in installer, one installer" Option 6 "Change SC for non-free firmware in installer, keep both installers" . . . Option 5 defeats Option 6 by ( 169 - 163) = 6 votes.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  That's too close. I hope they can have another debate and vote about just these two options.
- Denvercoder9 4y ago
  Option 6 was to make a separate image that doesn't contain any non-free firmware available. Option 5, the winning option, also intents to allow the user to choose whether non-free firmware should be used from inside the installer: > The included firmware binaries will normally be enabled by default where the system determines that they are required, but where possible we will include ways for users to disable this at boot (boot menu option, kernel command line etc.).
- ShinTakuya 4y ago
  Not sure how the vote was conducted, but if it was first past the post then it's a shame. Because I'm sure some of the folks who voted for other options would have preferred option 6.
  - nequo 4y ago
    Debian uses a Condorcet method (specifically the Schulze method?[1]). Here is the source code of their vote engine: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/devotee https://salsa.debian.org/debian/devotee [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method
    - ShinTakuya 4y ago
      Oh nice, thanks for sharing! Seems like a very fair method of decision making. Go figure and organisation such as theirs would do so
Karellen 4y ago
> On the other hand, I feel like a system should be usable immediately with little effort if it is to be enjoyed and properly useful. Not all distros have to be everything for everyone. It's OK to have a niche. If you want a distro that you can "just install" on any old bit of hardware that you have lying around, there are plenty of other distros out there that will do that already. I liked that Debian made you think about Freedom. If you wanted to use the "standard" installer and live up to Debian's Free Software ideals, as enshrined in Social Contract, you had to think about which companies made hardware that had Free drivers available, and make an effort to give your money to those that enabled that use-case. Or, burden of burdens!, you could spend a couple of extra minutes and a handful of clicks to track down the "unofficial" non-Free installer image. Seriously, it wasn't that hard. Yes, I know that the SC says that Debian's priorities are "our users, and Free Software" (but below "will remain 100% free"), but "our users" doesn't necessarily mean "all possible users". For those users that came to Debian primarily for the Freedom, I think this is a misstep. But, I don't determine which priorities and users are the most important to Debian, the membership does. And Debian is still one of the most committed to freedom distros out there, especially for its size. So, while this is not the choice that I would have made, now that it has been, I hope it makes Debian stronger going forwards.
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  However, Debian doesn't really warn prospective users about the real-world ramifications of its commitment to free software. It's one thing if the homepage had a big warning "this is for free software purists and you'll need to do a complex procedure if you want to run non-free firmware - if you're not ready for this, consider an easier distro like Ubuntu", but they don't. Technical people will understand or at least suspect these problems, but a novice user who wants to try Linux (they are non-technical and already don't fully understand the concept of distros - maybe someone once told them "try Debian" and so for them "Linux" is Debian), see a nice "Download" button on the homepage, try it out and then are left disgruntled not just by Debian but Linux in general when the thing doesn't work because their network card requires proprietary firmware, so they go back to Windows, running way more proprietary software than a firmware blob, and as a bonus they now have a negative opinion of "Linux". Having more users use some free software is better than those users giving up just so that some purists' ideological concerns be satisfied.
MiguelX413 4y ago
There already was an ISO with non-free firmware. I think that's the only reasonable way to make such a thing optional.

zozbot234 4y ago

> On the one hand, I love that Debian was the community GNU/Linux that shipped with the ability to be 100% unencumbered super easily. There will probably be an "unofficial 100% free installer" for those who care about that. The SC change does not forbid that, it just says that what Debian publishes by default should not introduce obvious breakage on systems where providing non-free firmware is required for proper operation.

nerdponx 4y ago
Isn't that kind of what Ubuntu is for? Without major players in the community taking a hard line on free software, incentives to support freedom will become even lower than they currently are today.
- eptcyka 4y ago
  Ubuntu is far more than a Debian fork nowadays - I think of the packages that are installed on most user systems, very little of them share the same source between Ubuntu and Debian.

jorvi 4y ago

> I feel like a system should be usable immediately with little effort if it is to be enjoyed and properly useful. More open source should think like this. I’ve been aggressively trying to get OpenWRT to ship the images with WiFi on by default. At this point 99.99% of people are not leaving their network unsecured, and if for some reason you have to reset the router it becomes a plastic brick unless you have an Ethernet cable and an USB-to-ethernet adapter nearby. Even suggestions of either creating a landing page that forces the user to set up security before allowing internet connectivity, or basing the WiFi password on the serial number (that is also on the back of any router) falls on deaf ears.

tiffanyh 4y ago
> At this point 99.99% of people are not leaving their network unsecured… 99.99% of people are doing what? Sorry, the double negative above is confusing me.
- CompuHacker 4y ago
  I think they are suggesting that years of abuse hurled at the average user, coupled with legislation, have caused all new home networks to be secure, one way or the other.
  - rascul 4y ago
    There is regulation for that? I would be interested in finding out more.
naasking 4y ago
> I’ve been aggressively trying to get OpenWRT to ship the images with WiFi on by default With what password? Plenty of people won't configure things they don't have to and that's a huge security hole. I don't see the utility in this change frankly.
- detaro 4y ago
  The comment you reply to both explains the utility and proposes ways of mitigating the "huge security hole".
  - naasking 4y ago
    So two clicks to turn on wifi that I can do from anywhere in my house is easier than digging my router out of my closet to write down and type in the serial number? This was supposed to be an idea that makes OpenWRT "usable immediately with little effort". This is not that.
    - 4y ago

nequo 4y ago

> It would be nice if they made it optional within the installer I suppose. Apparently this option lost by 6 votes: Option 5 "Change SC for non-free firmware in installer, one installer" Option 6 "Change SC for non-free firmware in installer, keep both installers" . . . Option 5 defeats Option 6 by ( 169 - 163) = 6 votes.

pessimizer 4y ago
That's too close. I hope they can have another debate and vote about just these two options.
Denvercoder9 4y ago
Option 6 was to make a separate image that doesn't contain any non-free firmware available. Option 5, the winning option, also intents to allow the user to choose whether non-free firmware should be used from inside the installer: > The included firmware binaries will normally be enabled by default where the system determines that they are required, but where possible we will include ways for users to disable this at boot (boot menu option, kernel command line etc.).
ShinTakuya 4y ago
Not sure how the vote was conducted, but if it was first past the post then it's a shame. Because I'm sure some of the folks who voted for other options would have preferred option 6.
- nequo 4y ago
  Debian uses a Condorcet method (specifically the Schulze method?[1]). Here is the source code of their vote engine: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/devotee https://salsa.debian.org/debian/devotee [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method
  - ShinTakuya 4y ago
    Oh nice, thanks for sharing! Seems like a very fair method of decision making. Go figure and organisation such as theirs would do so

Karellen 4y ago

> On the other hand, I feel like a system should be usable immediately with little effort if it is to be enjoyed and properly useful. Not all distros have to be everything for everyone. It's OK to have a niche. If you want a distro that you can "just install" on any old bit of hardware that you have lying around, there are plenty of other distros out there that will do that already. I liked that Debian made you think about Freedom. If you wanted to use the "standard" installer and live up to Debian's Free Software ideals, as enshrined in Social Contract, you had to think about which companies made hardware that had Free drivers available, and make an effort to give your money to those that enabled that use-case. Or, burden of burdens!, you could spend a couple of extra minutes and a handful of clicks to track down the "unofficial" non-Free installer image. Seriously, it wasn't that hard. Yes, I know that the SC says that Debian's priorities are "our users, and Free Software" (but below "will remain 100% free"), but "our users" doesn't necessarily mean "all possible users". For those users that came to Debian primarily for the Freedom, I think this is a misstep. But, I don't determine which priorities and users are the most important to Debian, the membership does. And Debian is still one of the most committed to freedom distros out there, especially for its size. So, while this is not the choice that I would have made, now that it has been, I hope it makes Debian stronger going forwards.

Nextgrid 4y ago
However, Debian doesn't really warn prospective users about the real-world ramifications of its commitment to free software. It's one thing if the homepage had a big warning "this is for free software purists and you'll need to do a complex procedure if you want to run non-free firmware - if you're not ready for this, consider an easier distro like Ubuntu", but they don't. Technical people will understand or at least suspect these problems, but a novice user who wants to try Linux (they are non-technical and already don't fully understand the concept of distros - maybe someone once told them "try Debian" and so for them "Linux" is Debian), see a nice "Download" button on the homepage, try it out and then are left disgruntled not just by Debian but Linux in general when the thing doesn't work because their network card requires proprietary firmware, so they go back to Windows, running way more proprietary software than a firmware blob, and as a bonus they now have a negative opinion of "Linux". Having more users use some free software is better than those users giving up just so that some purists' ideological concerns be satisfied.

MiguelX413 4y ago

There already was an ISO with non-free firmware. I think that's the only reasonable way to make such a thing optional.