Re: Analysis of the ballot options
* Joe Wreschnig (piman@debian.org) [040620 01:10]:
> On Sat, 2004-06-19 at 15:56, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Andrew Suffield (asuffield@debian.org) [040619 15:25]:
> > > Summary: you probably want 3 or 6.
> > Summary: I don't want a biased summary of someone who broke the
> > process of the release of sarge.
> >
> >
> > > On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 12:59:33PM -0500, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> > > > [ ] Choice 1: Postpone changes until September 2004 [needs 3:1]
> > > > [ ] Choice 2: Postpone changes until Sarge releases [needs 3:1]
> > > > [ ] Choice 3: Add apology to Social Contract [needs 3:1]
> > > > [ ] Choice 4: Revert to old wording of SC [needs 3:1]
> > > > [ ] Choice 5: "Transition Guide" foundation document [needs 3:1]
> > > > [ ] Choice 6: Reaffirm the current SC [needs 1:1]
> > Choice 6 is titled wrong. It's not a reaffirmation of the social
> > contract, it's an affirmation of a certain interpretation of the
> > social contract. An affirmation of another interpretation of the
> > social contract was not allowed to be put on the ballot.
> How do you interpret the social contract, then? Remember it doesn't use
> terms like "software" anymore. If you want non-free non-programs in
> Debian, you want a particular interpretation of the *old* SC. I know of
> no interpretation of the *current* SC that says we can have such things
> in Debian.
No. I don't want non-free programs in Debian. But if you ask me, about
what do I care more:
- solving the non-free issues now
- releasing now
I want to release now. Of course, the non-free issues need to be
solved, and I want to do this after the release. But - I'm convinced
that it is more urgent to release now.
Do you see how this fits into the social contract?
> > > Option 6 is the other position - that free software is what matters.
> >
> > Option 6 is the position that our users don't matter, and it's not
> > important to release.
>
> Option 6 is the position that free software matters, and Debian is a
> free operating system.
>
> (See, I can make short-sighted statements too.)
Well, any of us can make short-sighted statements, but I hope you see
that they don't help us.
> > If you think that our priorities are our users and the free software
> > community, and want to get sarge out of the door (and it's now almost
> > two years after the release of woody, which was on July 19th, 2002),
> > so that our users get current, stable software, supported by the
> > security team, you should vote for 1-5.
>
> Also, test the installer, fix RC bugs, fix really blatant licensing
> problems (like the bits of the kernel we don't have any permission at
> all to distribute), etc.
>
> This is not the only thing holding up sarge. If people had spent the
> past month pulling non-free shit from their packages instead of
> proposing this monstrous GR, we wouldn't need it.
Well, I'm solving each week at least one RC-bug. If everybody here
would do the same, we would've release sarge months ago.
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
Reply to: