[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Results of the Lenny release GR

On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 04:54:25PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> I've been reminded that as Acting Secretary I should officially announce the
> results of the recent vote.  My apologies for the delay!
> Details of the outcome and how various options were voted are available at 
> 	http://www.debian.org/vote/2008/vote_003
> The winning option was number 5, "Assume blobs comply with GPL unless proven
> otherwise", the full text of which is appended below.
> Since the election concluded, several developers have asked for some statement
> from the DPL and/or Secretary as to what this result really means.  Steve and
> I have discussed it, and we think it's pretty clear.  This result means that
> the Debian Lenny release can proceed as the release team has intended, with
> the kernel packages currently in the archive.

Hi Bdale,

What the release team intended (at least before the vote), as represented by
lenny-ignore tags is to skip more DFSG violations than just kernel packages,


However, your announcement seems to assume these only concerned kernel
packages.  This leaves the message open to interpretation, it could mean
any of the following:

  - You assume the release team no longer intends to ignore DFSG violations
    for these packages.

  - The RT gets an exception for kernel packages, as they intended, but not
    for the rest of Debian.

  - The developers are implicitly endorsing an exception for the rest of
    Debian packages.

Please, could you send a new message clarifiing the situation, and your
judgement as Secretary?


Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."

Reply to: