| 1 |
On Sat, 14 Feb 2015 18:36:38 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> I think we're going a bit too far down the rabbit hole. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Somebody asked in IRC whether we run linuxbios on our servers. Even |
| 5 |
> if we did, I'm sure the CPU schematics aren't published, or the |
| 6 |
> blueprints for the power plant that runs the datacenter. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Until the entire world runs on FOSS, I think we can live with Gentoo |
| 9 |
> simply trying to adhere to the social contract as best it can. We |
| 10 |
> don't have to run the tinderbox on a CPU whose specs date to the 80s |
| 11 |
> since that was the only one we could find with published schematics. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I'm not aware of any aspect of Gentoo that necessitates the use of |
| 14 |
> proprietary software to contribute to, at least not anything a |
| 15 |
> contributor would have to pay for / etc. If somebody spots something |
| 16 |
> and can offer a reasonable alternative, I'm sure it will be looked |
| 17 |
> into. I think everybody around here is fairly dedicated to FOSS. |
| 18 |
> That said, Gentoo has always been a bit pragmatic - we allow non-free |
| 19 |
> stuff into the portage tree, for example (heck, even paid proprietary |
| 20 |
> software where you need the original CD to use the ebuild). But, you |
| 21 |
> can always set your ACCEPT_LICENSE strictly and never accidentally |
| 22 |
> install it, and that won't hold you back from contributing at all. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Honestly, I'm not really seeing a lot of division here - just arguing |
| 25 |
> over definitions/etc. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I agree with you, we can't get rid of all proprietary components |
| 28 |
in real world, but: |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
1. We should try to do this when possible. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
2. We should estimate possible impact of a failure of such |
| 33 |
component. If BIOS or network card firmware will fail, we can use |
| 34 |
another hardware. And what if github will turn to be main |
| 35 |
development platform for Gentoo and it will fail or refuse service? |
| 36 |
Development will not be stopped completely, but will be impaired |
| 37 |
significantly. A whole project will suffer a major damage. I want |
| 38 |
to avoid that that's all. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Unfortunately my reasons above are not sheer speculation, unlike |
| 41 |
theoretical proprietary firmware failures I already had suffered |
| 42 |
from github blockade in our country. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Best regards, |
| 45 |
Andrew Savchenko |
Archives