On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 05:27:30PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 12:37:07PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > So far, people seem to be taking the position that it will better to
> > > first vote on whether or not we're going to move in this direction (a
> > > super majority decision) and then, once that decision is made to focus
> > > on the details.
> > Cut first, measure later?
> An interestingly reversed metaphor.
> It is the process of voting which will enable us to measure what we want
> to do. How we *act* upon that measurement is the "cutting".
Yes, and making a resolution is the process of acting. Changing our social
contract is acting. Removing non-free is acting.
> Passing a GR, in and of itself, does nothing tangible,
Tell me you're seriously claiming that passing a GR that resolves to
remove non-free and amend the social contract will result in no tangible
changes.
(By contrast, running a poll is an act of measurement, as is John's
popcon stats, as is setting up a separate nonfree.org repository and
seeing how much ongoing effort that is to maintain, as is working out
what the consequences of the decision -- particularly wrt contrib --
are in detail.)
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.
Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we can.
http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature