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

Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge

On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 01:31:30AM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
> I agree wholeheartedly with you. Unless we are capable of _right_now_ strip
> off all the non-DFSG software/firmware/data/you_name_it in a 3.0r3 release
> we are better off releasing sarge right away. 

If we really think we're in a problematic philosophical position by having
woody on our servers, then we should drop it. If we make a commitment,
we should do our best to keep it.

> Obviously, releasing sarge now would only be to the benefit to our
> users, which is also a requirement of our SC.

If you're happy to violate the social contract's requirement that
everything be free, there's no reason not to violate the requirement that
we think of our users or the free software community, or anything else.

Is that the level of commitment to the social contract you're advocating?

Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
Don't assume I speak for anyone but myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

Protect Open Source in Australia from over-reaching changes to IP law
http://www.petitiononline.com/auftaip/ & http://www.linux.org.au/fta/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: