4 ms·
> 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 firmw
by 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 agoThat's too close. I hope they can have another debate and vote about just these two options.
- Denvercoder9 4y agoOption 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 agoNot 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 agoDebian 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 agoOh nice, thanks for sharing! Seems like a very fair method of decision making. Go figure and organisation such as theirs would do so