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

Re: Analysis of the ballot options

On Sat, 2004-06-19 at 15:56, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield (asuffield@debian.org) [040619 15:25]:
> > Summary: you probably want 3 or 6.
> Summary: I don't want a biased summary of someone who broke the
> process of the release of sarge.
> > On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 12:59:33PM -0500, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> > > [   ] Choice 1: Postpone changes until September 2004  [needs 3:1]
> > > [   ] Choice 2: Postpone changes until Sarge releases  [needs 3:1]
> > > [   ] Choice 3: Add apology to Social Contract         [needs 3:1]
> > > [   ] Choice 4: Revert to old wording of SC            [needs 3:1]
> > > [   ] Choice 5: "Transition Guide" foundation document [needs 3:1]
> > > [   ] Choice 6: Reaffirm the current SC                [needs 1:1]
> Choice 6 is titled wrong. It's not a reaffirmation of the social
> contract, it's an affirmation of a certain interpretation of the
> social contract. An affirmation of another interpretation of the
> social contract was not allowed to be put on the ballot.

How do you interpret the social contract, then? Remember it doesn't use
terms like "software" anymore. If you want non-free non-programs in
Debian, you want a particular interpretation of the *old* SC. I know of
no interpretation of the *current* SC that says we can have such things
in Debian.

> > Option 5 may in itself be a good idea, but it is essentially
> > orthogonal here, and worse, it doesn't actually answer the question of
> > "what do we do about sarge?" - it just says "carry on", which says
> > "non-free release" if you were expecting a non-free release and "free
> > release" if you were expecting a free release.
> Option 5 is to un-do the breakage done by you.

I think it's unfair to criticize Andrew alone for breaking the release
process; I voted for the changes too. In fact, it's the "fault" of every
DD who didn't vote against it.

> > Option 6 is the other position - that free software is what matters.
> Option 6 is the position that our users don't matter, and it's not
> important to release.

Option 6 is the position that free software matters, and Debian is a
free operating system.

(See, I can make short-sighted statements too.)

> If you think that our priorities are our users and the free software
> community, and want to get sarge out of the door (and it's now almost
> two years after the release of woody, which was on July 19th, 2002),
> so that our users get current, stable software, supported by the
> security team, you should vote for 1-5.

Also, test the installer, fix RC bugs, fix really blatant licensing
problems (like the bits of the kernel we don't have any permission at
all to distribute), etc.

This is not the only thing holding up sarge. If people had spent the
past month pulling non-free shit from their packages instead of
proposing this monstrous GR, we wouldn't need it.
Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: