On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 22:26 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:22:25PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 19:11 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 10:55:00AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > > > We need the relevant maintainers to be told "your unwillingness to fix > > > > this means we will not be able to release". > > > > I don't think that's a particularly constructive approach to take, > > > especially not in a volunteer project. > > > I think that it is singularly non-constructive to see the maintainers of > > packages regard compliance with our foundational documents as wishlist > > items, and the release team regard such things as anything other than > > show-stoppers. > > No, really. The kernel team are volunteers. Ordering them to do things > doesn't help at all; one could equally well send the same message to > everyone working on Debian (or, indeed, the wider community) since they > could also step up to the plate and help fix this issue. [...] Actually, I've done the last part of the work to remove firmware (mostly adapting patches written by others). The remaining problems are (a) a very few drivers don't have redistributable firmware (b) most of the other patches have not been properly tested, at least not with the Debian kernel. Ben.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part