On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 05:08:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > 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. The FSF has been communicating with us regularly and there does seem to be movement inside -- just not as much as anyone (the FSF or us) would like. > 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. In all fairness. This two and a half years number is a little unfair. While the discussions on -legal last year brought us to some some concrete positions on the GFDL within Debian, they also undermined trust between some key members of the FSF and the Debian project in ways that have made a resolution to our issues more difficult. The committee has only been active for about half a year. Yes. That's still a long time but it's not 2.5 years. > Do we have an exit strategy? I don't think the exit strategy is really in doubt. If the talks fail, we'll vote on your position statement as a GR and act on GFDL docs in main accordingly. The controversial part is determining when those talks have failed. I think that this is best left up to the people doing the talking. You clearly disagree. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill mako@debian.org http://mako.yukidoke.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature