El mié, 17-11-2004 a las 19:27 +0000, Brian M. Carlson escribió: [...] > > Without wishing to start/take part in a huge flamewar didn't we have > > a vote and agree to leave such documentation issues until after > > Sarge's release? > > > > Here's the result I'm thinking of: > > > > http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_004 > > No, you agreed to revert the Social Contract to its previous wording, > IIRC. The Social Contract as currently worded (with that vote in > consideration) states that "Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software". > debian-legal interprets that to mean that (and please correct me if I > am misstating the consensus) the Debian distribution must consist > completely of free software. So if it is not software or it is not > free, then it would not be qualified to be in the Debian distribution. And documentation is not software. > Also, I think that even if those bugs in category 1) were ignored > until after the release (which would not make me happy), those bugs in > category 2) are still release-critical. And if you are correct and > "we"[0] did agree to such a thing, then the instant that Debian releases > sarge will be the instant that these will be serious. So fixing them > sooner rather than later is better for our users and free software. No. You have only detected some packages having GFDL documentation. Surgering them now will mean a lot of work, that we should concentrate in releasing Sarge, not in other different stuff. > > [0] Please note that I am not a DD, and if I had been at the time of > the vote, I would have voted for Proposal F. Whatever you had voted, what counts is what has been decided by majority. -- Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo jsogo@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada digitalmente