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

Re: Results of the Lenny release GR

On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 01:04 +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 09:45:48AM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> > However, analysis of the voting results in this and prior GRs relating
> > to similar issues in prior releases indicates to me that Debian
> > developers in general would prefer to release with faults than to defer
> > release until some arbitrary level of perfection is achieved.
> What you describe sounds like option 3, or maybe option 4.  What is your
> opinion on the fact that option 2 defeats both of them?

I'm not sure I agree with your sense of distinction here.  I think what
I'm saying is a fair rationalization of picking any of 2-5 over 1.  And,
at some point I think we cross the line from drawing meaningful
inferences from a limited data set to fiddling with divining rods...


However, having said that, and since you asked, I do have a thought on
this.  Options 2 and 5 share the attribute that neither explicitly
asserts that the firmware issue is a DFSG violation, while 3 and 4 both
seem to.  Perhaps our community is willing to admit there's a problem,
but isn't convinced or doesn't want to admit that the problem is a clear
contradiction of the social contract.


Reply to: