Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
* Anthony Towns (firstname.lastname@example.org) [040426 07:10]:
> As this is no longer limited to "software", and as this decision was
> made by developers after and during discussion of how we should consider
> non-software content such as documentation and firmware, I don't believe
> I can justify the policy decisions to exempt documentation, firmware,
> or content any longer, as the Social Contract has been amended to cover
> all these areas.
I can remember that the title was "editorial changes", and I can't
understand it how this can change the importance of the sections.
Furthermore, the exceptions till now was not due to the fact that we
don't require documentation to be free (quite contrary, there was a
consensus on d-legal about GFDL not free), but due to the fact that we
want to have enough time to come up with a proper solution.
> At the rate we're currently going, I don't really expect to be able to
> achieve this this year.
This means that we continue to deliver woody, which has more or less
exactly the same defects. If you really require a GR to prevent this,
this could happen - but it costs us a lot of time that I'd rather see
put into fixing bugs.
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C