Re: Negative Summary of the Split Proposal
On Mon, 5 Jul 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > The Proposal is Counter to the Social Contract
> > ~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~
>
> If you read the social contract you'll see that the very first point is
> `Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software'. In my opinion that means that
> adding a slight inconvenience (especially now that we have tools like
> dpkg-http and apt) is a minor price to pay for the benefits we will get.
And the fourth point says that we place our users first in our priorities.
Adding a slight inconvenience to all our users IS NOT placing our user's
interests first. The Debian Distribution -IS- 100% free software, you know
it and I know it - the proximity of non-free software does not effect our
comittment to free software.
> > It is Only the Start..
> > ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~
>
> I already answered this in a response to a post from Joseph Carter.
Unfortunately your response doesn't mean much. The opinion of the project
leader does not control the actions of his delagates. It's all well and
good that you don't want to see that happen, but it doesn't mean it
won't, and it doesn't mean that the next project leader will not want to
see it happen.
> > Cost
> > ~~~~
>
> I'm aware of the costs involved. I'm also confident that we'll find a
> way to get the proper resources.
I know you mostly are, the summary was intended for the rest of the
developers who are not aware, they have every right to make an informed
decisision when they vote.
Jason
Reply to: