Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 01:57:26 -0700, Joshua Kwan <email@example.com> said:
> With regards to other distros, we're currently the only one being so
> pedantic about this kind of thing. Why bother?
Because we are Debian, and we hold to higher standards?
> Yes, it's a matter of principle, but a considerable number of people
> have been tirelessly slaving over RC bugs to allow the sarge freeze
> to occur as soon as possible. Their work has largely gone to waste
> now as hundreds more RC bugs are awaiting packages pending a full
Destroying the essence of Debian as a matter of convenience is
a far worse slap in the face of everyone who has slaved to make
Debian what it is, and the whole Debian community that has come to
depend on Debian being what it is now.
> This is a bad idea. I will say, however, that I did *not* vote on
> this GR: strapped for time, I read the original call for votes as
> something trivial -- just some janitorial work to the social
> contract that did not change anything meaningful. The proposal
> failed to include a summary of the changes or even something like a
> wdiff(1) of the two versions.
I can't help it if you are too apathetic to read things posted
to debian-devel-announce. The initial call for discussion on March 23
with Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
had links to previous discussion, including the proposers link
which had all the information.
> I'm sure that in light of this thread, if the vote were to be
> re-done, the results would be significantly different.
Apathy means that you do not get to complain about the outcome.
If some day we are defeated, well, war has its fortunes, good and
bad. Commander Kor, "Errand of Mercy", stardate 3201.7
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C