Maybe we should try to get the Pandora successor certified by the FSF to get the "Respects Your Freedom" label.
I think this fits very well with the general ideology of the Pandora community.
Looking at the criteria, I think that the current Pandora is already pretty close. The main things that are problematic are:
1) Proprietary binary blob drivers for wifi and GPU: we would have to make sure that we have hardware for which FOSS drivers exist.
2) AFAIK, the firmware is 100% Free Software (except for the binary blobs mentioned above), so that is fine. But on the repo, which does have the status of "officially recommended", there is a mix of all kinds of software. To satisfy the FSF criteria, it would be necessary to only officially recommend Free Software. Of course "third parties" are free to offer what they want, but the "Official" project should not offer non-free software, or even advertise or link to the "third parties" that do. They don't have to try to prevent people from using that non-free third party software, but they shouldn't make it very easy either.
I think nobody would object to trying to address point 1 in a future device - experience has shown us that it sucks to be stuck with proprietary blobs. Point 2, I expect, is much more controversial. It would imply that non-free software like Kami Retro or DraStic would not be on the "official" repo anymore, but only on some third party repo.
Please discuss
I think this fits very well with the general ideology of the Pandora community.
Looking at the criteria, I think that the current Pandora is already pretty close. The main things that are problematic are:
1) Proprietary binary blob drivers for wifi and GPU: we would have to make sure that we have hardware for which FOSS drivers exist.
2) AFAIK, the firmware is 100% Free Software (except for the binary blobs mentioned above), so that is fine. But on the repo, which does have the status of "officially recommended", there is a mix of all kinds of software. To satisfy the FSF criteria, it would be necessary to only officially recommend Free Software. Of course "third parties" are free to offer what they want, but the "Official" project should not offer non-free software, or even advertise or link to the "third parties" that do. They don't have to try to prevent people from using that non-free third party software, but they shouldn't make it very easy either.
I think nobody would object to trying to address point 1 in a future device - experience has shown us that it sucks to be stuck with proprietary blobs. Point 2, I expect, is much more controversial. It would imply that non-free software like Kami Retro or DraStic would not be on the "official" repo anymore, but only on some third party repo.
Please discuss