Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 15:22 +0000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Thomas: your continued inaction and unwillingness to code an acceptable
> solution to this issue, in spite of being aware of the problem since
> at least 2004 -- over four years ago! -- means we will continue to do
> releases with non-free software.
I am *happy* to code an acceptable solution, but I regard "not support
the hardware for installation" as acceptable.
I ask simply that the project's standards be *applied*, or that at the
very least, we have a resolution as we did before. And yes, I would
likely vote against it, as I did before. But in a democratic system,
people generally are well advised to accept the result of past votes
gracefully and work towards the next one. That's what I did; my vote
did not carry the day last time, and I have not objected about that
decision since. But I *do* object to the apparent new rule that the
ftpmasters and release engineers are now empowered to ignore DFSG
violations without any review by anyone else.
And now we have people saying, "hey, let's exempt firmware from the
DFSG!" again, even though we have a GR on topic which decided that, no,
> "Hey, you've had four years; we're just going to keep releasing until
> you fix the bug."
> Hint: you're not being held hostage by anyone, seriously. You know how
> you can tell? Two words: Stockholm syndrome.
So I can upload an NMU right now that fixes the problem? That will be