Re: The new Social Contract and releasing Sarge
"Jamin W. Collins" <jcollins@asgardsrealm.net> schrieb:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 01:11:18AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 01:55:30PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
>> >
>> > Would have been time? There _was_ time, over 200 days in most
>> > cases. If the necessary change couldn't be made in 6+ months, how
>> > much longer should it be given?
>>
>> Sometimes the change has some other detrimental effect, and therefore
>> maintainers may have chosen not to make them unless they have to.
>
> Maybe we see things differently, but from my point of view, the
> maintainers have known for quite a while that they did have to change
> things.
One option of changing things would be to convince the FSF that the
current GFDL is not free, and to create a better version and aks
upstreams to "upgrade" to that one.
> 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.
In the FSF case, many people thought that waiting, moving flamewars to
other issues, and letting our representatives talk to the FSF would be
the best way of "working".
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Reply to: