Re: Bundled votes and the secretary
----- "Pierre Habouzit" <email@example.com> wrote:
> The point is, the secretary chooses interpretations that suits his own
> proposals to the vote. Explain to me how the "release lenny" options
> need [3:1] supermajority where the very same vote didn't need it in the
> past ?
>From a rigorous perspective, the release Etch vote should have been 3:1. If we are worth our salt we should not be allowing DFSG violations past "testing" and developers should be aggressive about filing bugs on errant packages. I can understand the necessity of providing certain users non-free drivers to help them get their equipment going. Serious users should be selecting equipment that won't have install problems. Last time I checked, this was a distribution for serious users (that also happens to want to be friendly to people just getting started). I fail to understand how serious Debian Developers arrive at a point where enforcing the DFSG is an exercise for "zealots".
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
firstname.lastname@example.org - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315