Re: Etch timeline is unrealistic because non-free firmware is NOT being dealt with
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 02:01:33AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Nope, the issue only surfaced early after the sarge release, a bit
> > less than a year ago, when the new kernel team formed.
> It was discussed *before* sarge was released that there was non-free
> firmware in the kernel, and we decided to ignore it for the sarge
> release. We explicitly did *not* decide to ignore it forever.
Maybe, but the kernel team was really operational, and not saddled with broken
legacy packaging only after the sarge release.
> > So, basically, you are criticizing the kernel team for not having devoted
> > enough of their *volunteer* time to this issue, and at the same time you
> > expect us to provide good quality kernel packages to debian ?
> No. I would be content with a "we don't support that hardware"
> decision, though it would be less than the best thing.
> I'm willing to wait for this work to be finished before etch is
Yep, but the question is, are the rest of the DDs willing to wait too ? This
is best answered by a GR, not sure if it needs 3:1 supermajority or not, i
think if it is only a delay-it-once-more, it does not need that, contrary to a
changing of the wording of the social contract would be.