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

Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge

[debian-boot? wtf? dropped.]

On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 10:00:58AM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
> > If we really think we're in a problematic philosophical position by having
> > woody on our servers, then we should drop it. If we make a commitment,
> > we should do our best to keep it.

> Emmm.. I didn't say that, no need to be harsh. I'm just saying that, if we 
> are to intrepret the SC based on "everything free", we are already 
> violating that, in both our mirrors and our currently distributed release.

Then, again, the logical conclusion is that we should drop woody from
our servers. I don't see any particular reason to be eager to violate
our own social contract that we just agreed to.

> - stop the release, stop distributing woody, close the mirrors and do an
> audit of all components and don't release until everything is cleared out.
> Select that one which you feel follows best our SC, they might be extremes, 
> but I don't believe there's middle ground here.

Well, here's one middle ground: 

The Debian system, ie the main section the current stable release,
is modified by making point releases and major releases. If we want
to make it comply with the new social contract we need to modify it,
and the way to do that is by making either a point release or a major
release -- and functional changes rather than security updates are done
by making a major update. Changing the Debian system to conform with
the new social contract immediately isn't possible -- we're required to
distribute a free operating system, so rm -rf isn't an option either --
but it's not unreasonable for a change to the social contract to take
some amount of time to come into effect. Certainly, that would've been
the case had the non-free vote passed.

I don't see any particular problems with taking as long as it takes to
update the Debian system to conform to the new social contract, although
obviously I'm disappointed that that looks like taking longer than a few

OTOH, if uploading packages and making a release isn't something that
is covered by the social contract, I can't really see how anything we
do could be. And I'm not willing to accept that as a principle.


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: