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

Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:01:23 +0200, Benj Mako Hill <mako@debian.org> said: 

> On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 06:00:15PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
>> Mako: any comments about the state of the GFDL talks (eg. whether
>> they happened or not)?

> The committee includes myself, Don Armstrong, and Eben Moglen (and
> nominally Henri Poole although he was not very active) and was
> started and initially mediated by Bruce Perens. We talked on phone
> and again in person in New York City and had a few issues we ironed
> out in email. We've come to agreement how to proceed and on a number
> of more substantive issues as well.

	Good. talking about how to talk about a rapprochement is
 better than nothing.

> Basically, the ball has been out of Don and my court for months and
> we've been expecting some sort of public announcement from FSF for
> as long. The DPL, Don and I have been in good touch with the FSF on
> the issue. They have not been able to wrap up the process on their
> end for a number of reasons (SCO being one big one I'm sure, but
> there are others).

	So, there has been no movement from the FSF's side; and the
 fact that you say that the ball is in their court is enough to
 convince me that the lack of progress is not Debian's fault.

> This has taken longer than anyone involved thought it would. Trust
> me, Don and I are *just* (probably more) as frustrated by this as
> anyone else is. We expect an announcement very soon and would be
> very sad to see this preempted.

	I would like to thank you for the work you have put into this.

	However, I do not see what exactly it is that is being
 preempted; there is no concrete evidence that any shift has occurred
 at all -- talking about how to talk further, after two and a half
 years since the talks started, seems a meager reward.

> Quite honestly, I suspect that part of the delay and lack of urgency
> has been due to the release manager's old position that GFDL
> freeness would not be a release issue. I've just sent an email to
> our counterparts at the FSF alerting them to the recent change in
> policy. Hopefully, this will force some quick movement on the
> issue. Until then, I'm not sure how much more I can say publicly
> without risking the confidentiality of the committee's discussion.

	I have always been concered about this NDA.

	So, how much time, you think, we should give this time around
 before we see some concrete evidence of forward motion?  How many
 such special dispensations do we allow before we realize that nothing
 is happening?

	Do we have an exit strategy?

One is not noble if one harms other living creatures. It is by non
violence to all forms of life that one is called noble. 270
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <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

Reply to: