Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot
On 2004-03-08 12:33:25 +0000 Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org>
And not always thanks to debian-legal, which wanted me to go to
about the QPLed emacs .el issue with the argument of : "we should be
polite to RMS".
That is a gross misreporting of Brian Thomas Sniffen's advice to you,
which was explained in some detail. Some -legal contributors still
helped you despite your attacks on them ("I have not known a more rude
bunch of people than the debian developers"), confusion between acts
of different developers ("the current tentative to remove non-free as
a threat to upstream authors" when BTS wrote he thought it better not
to threaten upstream) and trying to provoke debian-legal into
confrontations ("This is debian-legal, not
debian-please-stay-polite"). You seemed to be trying to make
debian-legal behave as your post today said they do, rather than how
they really are. Remember that debian-legal is a mailing list of many
developers and other contributors, not a single person.
That thread starts at
in case anyone wants to "lose time" seeing how Sven misleads -vote
readers again. I didn't read it all, but I still remember it from the
time. I didn't post in that thread: I don't want to lose so much time
to Sven Luther.
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ email@example.com
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/