On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 03:02:17AM +0000, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Choice 2: Allow Lenny to release with proprietary firmware [3:1] > ====== == ===== ===== == ======= ==== =========== ======== ===== Why on earth does it needs [3:1] whereas it wasn't needed for: http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Choice 3: Allow Lenny to release with DFSG violations [3:1] > ====== == ===== ===== == ======= ==== ==== ========== ===== Same question somehow applies here. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Choice 4: Empower the release team to decide about allowing DFSG violations [3:1] > ====== == ======= === ======= ==== == ====== ===== ======== ==== ========== ==== Unless I'm mistaken this shouldn't be [3:1] as it's specifically allowed by the § about delegates in the constitution. "Delegates shall take decision they see fit". What should be [3:1] is to dis-empower them from having such rights. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Choice 5: Assume blobs comply with GPL unless proven otherwise Why GPL ? Why not BSD ? Why not "DFSG" ? And FWIW I still believe this vote is an horrible mix-up of really different things, is completely confusing, and I've no clue how to vote. I would be surprised other people don't think the same. E.g. How can I decide 2 _and_ 4 ? Does the rule change ? Does any resolution that wins overs Further Discussion will be validated ? Because unless I'm mistaken, 2 doesn't imply 4, so if 2 wins, 4 is invalidated. This vote is nonsensical, and I'm hereby calling people to rank FD first or to boycott it. This is a practical joke. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpfrEbC11qqb.pgp
Description: PGP signature