Re: Analysis of the ballot options
* Josip Rodin (firstname.lastname@example.org) [040620 23:10]:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 10:07:35PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > See http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/06/msg00000.html (for the
> > proposal, seconded by Eduard Bloch, Michael Schiansky, Marco d'Itri,
> > Marc Haber, John H. Robinson (IV), giving the required quorum of the
> > constitution), and rejected by the secretary in that form because it
> > also spoke about the release interval, see
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/06/msg00035.html
> > | I am just saying that portions of this proposal, as it reads
> > | now, do not address the issue that the current GR addresses, and
> > | must needs go on another ballot, and another vote.
> Hmm, yeah, the short point appeared to have gotten sidetracked by all that
> verbiage, and the promise of yearly release sounds optimistic at best.
Well, the promise was only to do regular releases. ;)
The "about once a year" was only a guide-line. (I know why I wrote it
this soft way, and not hard.)
> I'd second a resolution that simply said that we acknowledge that the
> meaning of the first clause of the social contract, regardless of whether
> we say "free according to the DFSG" or "free software" or "free monkeys",
> is not set in stone and its interpretation is variable.
> Another option on the same resolution would be that the interpretation
> is exactly this-and-that, but with the difference that the people would
> actually be voting for or against something concrete and their votes
> couldn't be interpreted to mean something else than what was advertized
> and what they intended.
Well, as the current vote has already started, we can take our time
after the vote to see if we really need to make another vote. I'd like
to don't do it, but - well, I don't expect it.
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C