Hi,
Here's a revised set of options with a number of changes relative to the first
one:
- Added option 1 / point 2
- Remove confusing sentence from options 2,3 / point 4
- Replaced option 2 / point 2 (written by Manoj Srivastava)
- Simplify option 2 / point 4 not to assert that firmware must be in udebs
(suggested by Holger Levsen)
- Added "to the best of our knowledge" phrase to each option
(suggested by Peter Samuelson and Hubert Chathi)
- Typo fix (spotted by Frans Pop)
I hereby propose this General Resolution:
Option 1 (reaffirm the Social Contract)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
community (Social Contract #4);
2. We acknowledge that we promised to deliver a 100% free operating system
(Social Contract #1);
3. Given that we have known for two previous releases that we have
non-free bits in various parts of Debian, and a lot of progress has
been made, and we are almost to the point where we can provide a
free version of the Debian operating system, we will delay the
release of Lenny until such point that the work to free the operating
system is complete (to the best of our knowledge as of 1 November 2008).
Option 2 (allow Lenny to release with proprietary firmware)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
community (Social Contract #4);
2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress in the kernel firmware
issue; most of the issues that were outstanding at the time of the
last stable release have been sorted out. However, new issues in the
kernel sources have cropped up fairly recently, and these new issues
have not yet been addressed;
3. We assure the community that there will be no regressions in the progress
made for freedom in the kernel distributed by Debian relative to the Etch
release in Lenny (to the best of our knowledge as of 1 November 2008);
4. We give priority to the timely release of Lenny over sorting every bit
out; for this reason, we will treat removal of sourceless firmware as a
best-effort process, and deliver firmware as part of Debian Lenny as
long as we are legally allowed to do so.
(Since this option overrides the SC, I believe it would require 3:1 majority)
Option 3 (allow Lenny to release with DFSG violations)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
community (Social Contract #4);
2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress on DFSG compliance
issues; however, they are not yet finally sorted out;
3. We assure the community that there will be no regressions in the progress
made for freedom in the packages distributed by Debian relative to the
Etch release in Lenny (to the best of our knowledge as of 1 November
2008);
4. We give priority to the timely release of Lenny over sorting every bit
out; for this reason, we will treat fixing of DFSG violations as a
best-effort process.
(Since this option overrides the SC, I believe it would require 3:1 majority)
--
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."
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature