Re: The new Social Contract and releasing Sarge
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 11:28:34PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> Letting these items sit without corrective action being taken/started
> for 200+ days hoping that something would be done externally directly
> lead to part of the situation we now find ourselves in (I am in no way
> saying this was the intent of the recent GR). Had work been done on
> these packages from the beginning, regardless of the sarge-ignore tags,
> we wouldn't be in such a bind.
For those packages where the problem is the GFDL (which from what I
gather seems to be a reasonable chink of them) I'd say that the work
Mako and others are doing with the FSF is constructive work on resolving
the issue. You may question the results but I don't think it's fair to
say the problem is being completely ignored.
> Was this not a problem that would have needed to be addressed after the
> sarge release anyway? If so, why postpone it? In the hopes sarge was
> released soon? That shouldn't have stopped the developer's from working
> to correct their packages in the meantime.
There's also the usefulness issue to consider - clearly, the best way
out of this problem is to get all the things we want to release licensed
under a free license but that's obviously not the case at present.
Given that situation deciding to keep the documentation for the time
being in the hope that a more constructive solution can be found seems
like a perfectly sensible situation.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
Reply to: