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

Re: DFSG violations in Lenny: Summarizing the choices

On Nov 08, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:

> So while I am personally of the DFSG only makes sense for executable
> *software* that runs on the host CPU, previous GR's have shown that
> this position has a distinct minority.  So why not let the DFSG
> hard-liners win this one completely?  The current kernel team, if they
I agree. While I have always opposed the "editorial changes" and the
removal of firmwares from Debian, if the DFSG-revisionists won I can't
see why the DFSG should be selectively enforced.
Either we create (i.e. vote) a document defining which parts of the DFSG
can be ignored for an indefinite time or the release managers and
ftpmasters should apply it as usual every time a violation is reported
and confirmed.

Myself, I'd like a Debian fork with RHEL kernels anyway...


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: