On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 11:27:01AM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Brian Nelson <pyro@debian.org> wrote: > > In any case, I think the GFDL is too well entrenched in Debian for the > > ctte to be summoned. A GR is the only reasonable way to decide what to > > do with it. > I'm considering a GR on what I have for breakfast tomorrow. Except, no, > I'm not. That would be stupid. The situation with the GFDL is fairly > straight forward - we had a vote that altered the social contract in > such a way that documentation unambiguously has to be DFSG free. We had > another vote where, having had the consequences explained to them, > people chose not to revert that decision. Now you want another GR to > decide something that we've already decided? > GRs should be something that happen very rarely. They're the only thing > that let us change our infrastructure, and that's what they should be > limited to. Not rehashing decisions that have already been made. Not > trying to force people to behave in certain ways. And, depressingly, not > to let me avoid having to make my own mind up when faced with the choice > between toast and cereal. [ ] toast [ ] cereal [ ] toast, then cereal [ ] cereal, then toast [ ] gruel [1] further discussion No breakfast for you... -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature