Re: Bundled votes and the secretary
* Julien BLACHE:
>>> [ ] Choice 2: Allow Lenny to release with proprietary firmware [3:1]
>> We're not changing the DFSG. So there's no need for 3:1.
> We're overriding it, so it requires 3:1, and it was the same for the
> waiver for Etch.
Are we? I mean, this stuff is already in the archive, in main, and as
far as I can tell, the release team can release from main at any point
in time they see fit (practical considerations notwithstanding).
The Social Contract does not even mention the word "release". A
release doesn't really change if we are in conformance or not. The
release team has little control over the conformance aspect,
especially if core packages are affected for which remove is not an
In this light, requiring a 3:1 supermajority just to underscore that
the release team is, in fact, the release team and can release from
main is a bit out of line, isn't it?
Oh, and I'm quite offended how this whole thing is used to pressure
developers to do certain work, contrary to the spirit of Constition