Re: incorrect statement on www page

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Jonathan Gray wrote:

> If these binary only components come with FreeBSD they are part
> of FreeBSD as far as most people are concerned.  There are binary
> components with no publically available source code in FreeBSD,
> so it is not full source code.
> 
> Additionally supporting such things hinders progress on acceptable
> alternatives be they drivers with full source or use of other vendors.

There are two ways I can see to proceed on this.

1. The project can change the offending text to be a link to a separate
page that contains a paragraph, or paragraphs, about what is included
in source vs binary form and the philosophical reasons that we have
chosen to include the binaries (e.g. that otherwise some hardware that
people have already purchased will not operate).  This text could
include an explanation of why no one in open source feels that this
development is optimal, and a disclaimer that sometimes expedience
dictates such things.

2. The project could leave the offending text as it is and get on doing
what it does best, e.g. writing software and fixing bugs, instead of
writing philosophical treatises.

I think everyone reading this can figure out which I think is the
better solution.  And if that means that we lose a few users who can't
deal with the binary blobs being there to, for instance, Debian or
OpenBSD (who seem more concerned with such philosophical deliberations),
well, fine.

In the meantime there are plenty of substantive problems to work on that
we stand a chance of resolving to everyone's satisfaction.  IMHO this
isn't one of them.

mcl