Bug#830978: Browserified javascript and DFSG 2
On Wed, 13 Jul 2016, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:43:34 -0500 Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> wrote:
> > Are you asking the CTTE to make a non-binding formal announcement
> > using 6.1.5 as to whether, in the opinion of the CTTE, browerified
> > source is source under the DFSG?
>
> Yes.
[...]
> > Or potentially overrule the release managers determination of
> > whether this particular bug is RC or not?
>
> Yes, this would be a result of first question (whether browserified
> source is dfsg free). If browserified source is dfsg free, this bug
> cannot be rc.
If we addressed the first question (non-binding announcement), the
release managers could still decide differently.
The RMs are the people who decide whether a bug is RC or not. The RMs
can decide to delegate the decision to us, but I don't think that the
CTTE is able to decide this without the RMs making the first decision.
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
The sheer ponderousness of the panel's opinion [...] refutes its
thesis far more convincingly than anything I might say. The panel's
labored effort to smother the Second Amendment by sheer body weight
has all the grace of a sumo wrestler trying to kill a rattlesnake by
sitting on it---and is just as likely to succeed.
-- Alex Kozinski, Dissenting in Silveira v. Lockyer
(CV-00-00411-WBS p5983-4)
Reply to: