Re: All GPL'ed programs have to go to non-free
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:52:19PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> (GR2004-004 didn't make
> any sense at all, nor does it make any sense that Sarge can ship
> with non-free documentation, and at the time I found the posts of
> the RM on the topic to make no sense at all, but I was satisfied with
> the results of GR2004-003 and am able to bear the strangeness of
> GR2004-004 for now, since it'll expire on its own.)
> (And if people really are voting for a GR after only reading the title,
> I'd be even more disappointed, but I just don't believe that.)
It's funny that out of the five people seconding GR2004-003, the first
three did either second or even propose one of the first two suggestions
If even the Debian developers seconding a GR are supporting changes to
the result of this GR only one month later...
> In any event, all of this is irrelevant: if people really think that
> non-free documentation should be allowed in Debian, propose a GR to
> allow it. Nothing short of that will make it so. If people really
> think they were "tricked", fine--fix it with another GR. Unless and
> until that happens, Debian's position is very clear.
In GR2004-004, Proposal D to revert GR2004-003 did get a 2.3:1 majority
by the developers over the proposal to keep the changes of GR2004-003.
That's a pretty clear statement.
The nice thing about 3:1 majorities is, that once you've tricked
something as "Editorial amendments" into it, a 25% minority is enough to
block reverting it...
> Glenn Maynard
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed