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

Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge

On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 04:35:20PM -0400, Travis Crump wrote:
> In other words, why were the GFDL bugs marked as 
> sarge-ignore instead of just closed as invalid[or perhaps downgraded to 
> wishlist]?

Because we were expecting to make a policy decision to consider non-free
documentation unacceptable for main. At the time, this decision -- like
considering whether Build-Depends are release critical, or what version
of the Python policy is expected to be supported -- was possible to make
at that level. That doesn't seem to be the case any longer.


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: