Re: Proposed amendment: Resolving DFSG violations
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 02:46:47AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 06:40:14PM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I propose to amend the Robert's resolution by adding the following choice
> >-----------
> >The Debian project, recognizing that bugs do not fix themselves,
> >applauds Ben Hutchings's efforts to remove non-DFSG-conformant bits from
> >the linux-2.6 package in a way that is still making users a priority. It
> >instructs the project leader to authorize spending of Debian funds to
> >send a box of chocolates to Ben.
> >-----------
>
> I've made a point of telling people that I think Ben is about the only
> one who deserves any praise for what's been happening on the kernel
> front. I'll happily help to push beer/chocolate/$foo at him as a thank
> you for that, regardless of any vote here.
>
> >I belive that Robert's resolution is a waste of time
>
> Seconded.
As a matter of fact, if you want to send chocolate to Ben I second that too.
I'd appreciate if you don't use a GR procedure for that, though, it makes us
look like a bunch of clowns.
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
Reply to: