On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 01:24:13PM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote: > So instead of trying ot change the way some developers and users think, > we'd rather change our foundation documents? Changing our foundation documents is a way of changing what developers and users think. At the moment we claim on one hand that "Debian will be 100% free", then on the other hand claim "oh, except for firmware because we don't have time right now". > In my opinion, a project like Debian is never ready, and never perfect. > Everybody knows that we are not meeting the freedom goals in the SC to > 100% (as well as other goals)[1]. If "everybody knows that", why are we discussing this at all -- if the social contract is just something we'd like to achieve one day, like world peace or an end to hunger, why do we need a general resolution to acknowledge that we're not meeting it now? > But I do not see this as a failure, > rather as a challenge. So why not try to explain this to the people, > instead of lowering our standards? Why not have the project have a process of continually raising and then meeting its standards, rather than continually failing to meet them and having to find some way to excuse it? > We don't lower our standards with > respect to software quality or security support, either, even if we do > miss our goals. We don't claim to have higher standards than we actually do for those things either, though. Nor do we consider them "foundation documents". Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature