Re: call for seconds: on firmware
On Sun, Nov 16 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 04:24:18PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Hm, no, the impression that I got from this discussion that at least
>> several people here think the result of "Further discussion" is:
> Let me observe that the fact that "several people here think" is not
> That said, I disagree with point (ii) of your interpretation:
>> i Do we require source for firmware in main: Yes
>> ii Do we allow the Release Team to ignore SC violation bugs: No
>> iii What do we do for Lenny: Wait
>> iV Do we modify foundation documents: No
>> v Do we override foundation documents No
> it should rather be "Yes":
>> ii Do we allow the Release Team to ignore SC violation bugs: Yes
> Rationale: with "further discussion" nothing changes. Today RMs are
> empowered, by delegation, to decide upon transitions and
> "lenny-ignore" tags. It will be the same tomorrow if "further
> discussion" wins.
What they are not empowered to do is to decide to release with
DFSG violations in main. If you think there is such a powere delegated
to them, you need to show that these powers are there with the DPL in
the first place, or that they belong to the RM.
So, sure, they can ad whatever tags they wish to the BTS. But
the release Lenny woth stuff the SC says we will not have in the Debian
system, sorry, no.
> If people disagree with that, they can overrule delegates' decision as
> supported by our constitution.
Err, it should not come to that, since they would be exceeding
their authority in the first place (releasing something that the SC
says Debian shall not).
> BTW, this is yet another hint that separate ballots would have been
> better, because we are implicitly calling for another GR in some
> special case, but unfortunately Dato's proposal to split ballots
> doesn't seem to have gained enough momentum.
We can have a spearate vote on what to do post lenny, if people
still want that. But currently, with the issue on how to go about
releasing lenny, all these proposals are related.
"'Tis true, 'tis pity, and pity 'tis 'tis true." Poloniouius, in Willie
the Shake's _Hamlet, Prince of Darkness_
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C