Draft position statement of the kernel team about the ongoing vote

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

Hi all, ...

I have drafted the following document on our wiki page :

  ===
  There are currently two proposals being voted on, with a call for vote done
  hurriedly and without consideration for the position statement of the kernel
  team, nor for the fact that the below proposal was still being worked on.

  The kernel team has the following problems with the actual being voted on GR.

    Proposal 1, is entitled : "Choice 1: Release Etch even with firmware"
    is highly misleading, because the proposal means actually that :

    1. We will not release as part of etch those firmwares removed in etch,
       which include popular drivers used for installation as tg3 and acenic.

    2. We will not release as part of etch those firmwares which are non-distributable,
       which includes all those drivers with non-distributable firmwares, including
       those placed de-facto under the GPL but which are sourceless.

    3. We will not release as part of etch, those firmwares which are DFSG non-free,
       which includes all remaining firmwares under discussion.

    As thus, the short title of the proposal placed on the ballot, is actually saying 
    the contrary of what the proposal actually means.

  This is a severe breach of thrust between the ballot and the voter, and will
  mean another renewal of the infamous "cosmetical changes GR", and as thus the
  kernel team puts out a call to everyone participating in the vote, to recast
  their votes, favoring "Further Discussion" over the other options.  
  ===
http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing#head-c26dd537094f806af748898fb0c8c512c99e4be4

This is a serious issue, and i am very very displeased at Manoj, for
having done that, and not waited for our consensual proposal to be on the
ballot, as well as using such a misleading short title, and thus lying to the
voters about the content of the proposal.

At this point, i don't think we can consider the result of the hurried vote as
valid, and in any case, it will not do what we wanted, even despite the
excuses set by the RMs that they will overlook this badly worded proposal,
shall it win.

I await comments on this topic, and if i get none by friday evening, i will
post the above position statement widely.

Frederik, i urge you to rescind your acceptance of Manoj's amendment ASAP,
since it is clear you where mislead as to the content of it and its
consequences.

Friendly,

Sven Luther