On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 10:47:04PM -0400, Duncan Findlay wrote: > I wish to propose the following amendment: > That point 2. above be changed to read: > 2. that these amendments, which have already been ratified by the > Debian Project, will be reinstated immediately after the release of > the next stable version of Debian (codenamed sarge), without > further cause for deliberation. > Rationale: > > A fixed four month period should (based on current projections) give us > > ample time to release sarge, while not allowing so much time that > > maintainers are left to think that resolving the status of non-program > > components of Debian vis ? vis the DFSG is not an imminent concern. > While a four month period should be enough time to release sarge, > without this amendment, we leave open the possibility that we do not > release in time and must repeat this process again. I think it's best > to declare explicitly how long this exception should remain in effect > rather than assume that we have picked a big enough window. Although > on the downside, it relieves some pressure to release sarge soon, but > it also prevents us from rushing to release by September 1 which may > result in an inferior product. > I really hope that this amendment is not needed (i.e. we release by > September 1 anyways), but I think we should allow for the worst, just > in case. > Steve (and all those who seconded the original resolution), I hope you > accept this amendment. Failing that, I would like to seek sponsors for > this amendment to the proposal. There are two primary considerations influencing my choice of a fixed period instead of delaying the enactment relative to sarge's release: - as mentioned, a fixed period leaves people less likely to think this is something they can defer indefinitely (since as we all know, "after sarge" is "indefinite" ;P), as just because it may be "sarge-ignore" doesn't mean it should be allowed to languish (merely treated with a priority similar to "important" bugs) - as a release assistant, I don't want to have to deal with crazies claiming that I'm deliberately delaying sarge's release to foster further infiltration of non-free docs in main. :P While building a consensus around your amendment would address the second point, I don't think it addresses the first; so I think I must reject this amendment. I don't object at all to you getting seconds for it on its own, though. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature