Re: [GNU-linux-libre] review PureOS ISO

[Zlatan Todoric]

On 11/09/2016 04:52 PM, Jaromil wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Nov 2016, Zlatan Todoric wrote:
>
> > > tl;dr - an 100% free distro should not include, recommend nor
> > >           facilitate the installation of non-free software. a bios
> > >           firmware is also distributed software
> > We do not recommend nor faciliate installation of non-free software, and if
> > the bios firmware is the issue then all OSes fail on any hardware post 2009
> > - but I thought OS is separate from hardware in this discussion, maybe I am
> > wrong.
> this is the misunderstanding then.
>
> because you are recommending the option of getting your distribution
> through a pre-installed medium (a laptop PC) which includes non-free
> software (as its bios), then its hard to "separate from hardware in
> this discussion". People here evaluate a sort of "user journey" to see
> if, as someone approaching your distribution, one would ever be
> proposed to use/install non-free software. That it should be so it is
> clearly stated in the 100% free guidelines published by the FSF.

That is our business model, what is the problem there? You can download 
PureOS and install it on non-Librems. I really don't see the point of 
your mail - if we start recommending for installation of all FSF 
endorsed distros, will that render them nonfree as well - because we are 
free to that as well as you're free to download our OS and use it 
without purchasing our hardware.

One will never get to install non-free software with our OS, so the 
journey is good. Things can only get better, not worse because of us. 
Bashing us for taking different pathway (to yours) to spread FLOSS into 
hands of average user will gain you nothing.

> I hope this helps clearing the misunderstanding.
>
> ciao