[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [voss@seehuhn.de: vote graph for GR2004-004]

Raul Miller writes ("[voss@seehuhn.de: vote graph for GR2004-004]"):
>     http://seehuhn.de/comp/GR2004-004.html
> Seems to indicate that option B is likely to win.

Right.  (Good.)

> Given that the old release policy was implicitly based
> on an ambiguous interpretation of the social contract,
> and given that the release manager has asked us to take
> a hand in deciding about release management policy, I
> think we need to start thinking more seriously about
> what we want to say about this policy.

Why don't we just say that the release policy for sarge, as regards
licensing questions, should be that applied for woody ?

> [Personally, I'd have much preferred the transition
> policy guide, which reflects quite a bit of thought
> about such policy, but there's a significant chance
> that it will not win this election.]

I'm not sure whether the transition guide document was useful, but I'm
convinced it wasn't a good thing to have as part of the social
contract, entrenched so that only a 3:1 general resolution can change
it !


Reply to: