Am Sonntag, dem 18.04.2021 um 14:04 +0200 schrieb Jonathan Carter: [..] > While this vote caught a lot of heat, essentially it's quite a trivial > vote. I think this is wrong. And here is why: > Ultimately it had become a question of if and how we should > respond to an external situation. The vote was actually two votes: a) Should Debian respond publicly as a project? (the "if) b) How should such a response read? (the "how") And I feel that a) should receive a supermajority before b) can be decided by a normal majority. FWIW: I don't believe in any of the bullshit written here that Debian should stay neutral or that this vote backs up that Debian should stay neutral. The vote was about a very specific case. It might have gone differently if we would have voted about a Harvey Weinstein or another Hans Reiser within the FOSS community. > I think that as Debian grows, as the > free software eco-system grows, and as software gets ever more ingrained > in our every day life, the questions and problems we're going to face > will become increasingly complex and that we should adapt to be able to > deal with those as a project. +1 > Can we go ahead and set up such a working group? +1 Regards, Daniel -- Regards, Daniel Leidert <dleidert@debian.org> GPG-Key RSA4096 / BEED4DED5544A4C03E283DC74BCD0567C296D05D GPG-Key ED25519 / BD3C132D8B3805D1808123AB7ACE00941E338C78
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part