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

Re: RFD: amendment of Debian Social Contract

On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 04:18:19AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>   13) Clause 5 has been stricken entirely.  *This amendment does NOT
>       mandate the removal of the non-free section from anything,
>       anywhere.*  What it does do is withdraw our commitment to provide a
>       "non-free section" via a File Transfer Protocol (FTP) archive
>       specifically.  This makes it possible for us to decide, in the near
>       or distant future, to stop distributing the non-free section without
>       violating our own Social Contract.
> This is part of the rationale.  This goes on the ballot.  It
> *absolutely* should go on the ballot if you, as Project Secretary, feels
> there is a reasonable chance of the proposal being misunderstood
> otherwise.

You might want to consider putting this up some paces. Having such a
crucial part of your RfD at position 13) of your rationale might get it

I'm speaking out of personal experience, as I was unable to catch the
removal of Clause 5 from casually reading the word-diff and only found
out about it by having a look at Richard's nice HTML page.

Of course, I did not read through your proposal in detail, as I was
short on time back then and it was only a proposal. But a couple of
other DDs, presented only with the ballot, might overlook the deletion
of Clause 5, too.

(I'd like to add that I applaud the deletion of that clause, although
I'm not sure we should mix up all that stuff)

Of course, I did not read most of the discussion on -vote in the last
days, so excuse me if this has been covered extensively already.


"My personal opinion is that I think RMS should be debian's leader, and
he should change the name to 'The GNU Operating System' or 'The GNU
Distribution'. Only with a leader who knows the value of equality can 
the project get rid of these idiots." -- Eray Ozkural

Reply to: