On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 09:01:15AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On Nov 2, 2003, at 00:04, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > What do you mean, without a mandate? If the GR passes with a > > landslide, woudn't that be a mandate? > Would you be happy if Branden added a clause along the lines of: > Further, the acceptance of the GR is not intended as a mandate > to actually remove the non-free or contrib sections of our > FTP archive. For reference, I wouldn't be. Either: Further, non-free and contrib shall be removed from the archive, and no longer supported by the Debian project. or Further, non-free and contrib shall continue to be supported by the Debian project. on the other hand would be unobjectionable. If you confuse those two points, whichever happens (non-free staying or being removed), one or the other group is going to (justifiably IMO) feel cheated. Put both on the ballot if you like. But clarity is a good thing. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review! -- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
Attachment:
pgp2EF_Kd3iiC.pgp
Description: PGP signature