On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:46:58PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > This is all kind of a mess, and I think Debian would be well-served by > looking for opportunities to minimize the very real and significant cost > to Debian contributors for doing boring and demotivating paperwork. > That's probably more important, in general terms, than problems that are > strictly theoretical. > > The problem with all of these discussions, however, and the reason why I > largely stopped participating in them (particularly with my Policy Editor > hat on), is that the rules for what one actually has to do in Debian to > get a package accepted are a bit confusing and only partly documented, and > the people who set those requirements basically don't participate in these > discussions. As long as the decision-makers aren't participating and we > don't have clear documentation of the rules, even talking about it is > pointless. > > I feel like what we really need is a working group that contains members > with the authority to speak for ftpmaster, along with a good cross-section > of interested parties, to get together on a public but separate mailing > list and hash out a concrete proposal for how we think copyright and > license notices should work in the project. Then bring that back to the > project. Otherwise, we're just going to keep having this discussion every > three months or so, and nothing is going to really change. YES. -- cheers, Holger
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature