Re: [AMENDMENT] Re: seconds searched for override of resolution 007 needed.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 02:14:58AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> ==== BEGIN OF PROPOSAL ====
> We, the Debian project, find freeness that we want for firmware used by
> the kernel is an important question, and that we will have to deal with
> this. However, we think that we as a project need more time to deal
> with it, and having more general resolutions isn't going to solve this.
>
> Therefor we will not have another general resolution about firmware until
> after the release of etch and atleast 6 moths have passed since this
> general resolution. This does not mean we will not discuss this issue,
> or work on getting things better.
> ==== END OF PROPOSAL ====
Kurt, you do know that even if you passed this, it is anti-constitutional, and
not binding any way ? I proposed a "no more GRs until the etch release"
proposal a few weeks ago, you know. In any case, your proposal will be put to
vote after the already seconded proposal you are unhappy with.
Also, i want you to explain something about this. You say the current
resolution is fine, while you said that you voted without even reading it, and
that it has some consequences that the kernel team didn't want.
Also, i want to know from you how a resolution that the RMs already said,
before the vote was completed, that they would not respect it, can in any
sense of the word be a good proposal.
Are you going to step behind your words, and help the kernel team investigate
those issues, as well help coding the code which will prune the kernel from
those firmwares the current resolution forces us to remove ? Are you going to
do user support, when those users will be unable to use debian to install
their systems ? Or maybe you will single-handedly implement non-free loading
support in d-i, and convince the d-i leadership that they should indeed
include it in etch, despite them saying "No way" about exactly this. Not
speaking about those in the kernel team who said they would leave if those
firmwares where removed.
Or do you think we should indeed delay etch at least 6 months as the d-i team
said we should. This is indeed a possibility, but then why not say so directly ?
There are many folk who are all so happy to critic my mails and actions and
thinkings about the subject, but then, they don't care about the mess caused,
because they don't will be the ones having to handle it.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: