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

Re: Summary: Proposal - Rescind GR 2004-003

On Fri, May 07, 2004 at 01:06:00AM +0200, Osamu Aoki wrote:
>  * Can Craig and people who seconded original proposal [2] to second
>    this as the formal rationale for Craig's proposal [1]?

i am happy with this version of my amendment and the rationale for it.

>  * Those whose name appear but not seconding resolution, please approve
>    the use of your name in this context. (Anthony Towns and Ian Jackson)
>    If not OK, I will appreciate suggestion for the acceptable alternative.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Craig Sanders proposed the following resolution [1] (reformatted):
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The Debian Project, 
> affirming its commitment to principles of freeness for all works it
> distributes, 
> but recognizing that changing the Social Contract today would have grave
> consequences for the upcoming stable release, a fact which does not
> serve our goals or the interests of our users, 
> hereby resolves:
>    that the amendments to the Social Contract contained within the
>    General Resolution "Editorial Amendments To The Social Contract"
>    (2004 vote 003) be immediately rescinded.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Here is the list of rationale raised for this proposal:
>  * People can make mistake and should be allowed to correct it.
>  * This deserves to be an option on the ballet.
>  * Full impact assessment by Anthony Towns [3] revealed the hidden issues.
>  * We need to get the sarge out the door ASAP. [4]
>  * All other proposed GRs to get the sarge out are better than the
>    situation created by GR (2004-003).  But they still seem to put heavy
>    limitations on the post-sarge releases.  This proposal solves them
>    for good. [8]
>  * Title of GR (2004-003) was, at least, "misleading" although it may not
>    have been intentionally deceptive.
>  * Change of SC by GR (2004-003) was not clarification but a radical
>    change which subverts the original intent of the old SC.
>  * GR (2004-003) may have been incomplete.
>  * Rescinding GR (2004-003) will enable useful data, font, documentation,
>    and firmware [5] to be included in main.  This will make Debian
>    useful distribution.
>  * Rescinding GR (2004-003) will clarify and affirm that the correct
>    interpretation of the word "software" in old SC does not include
>    things such as data, font, documentation, and firmware.
>  * Historical document [5] has its own value and even good willed
>    "editorial change" [6] may not be even desirable. (Some of us will also
>    support other proposals for the GR if they address our concern.)
>  * Obscure arrangement for distribution required by the GR (2004-003) may
>    marginalize Debian only for "Holier Than Stallman", i.e., the fringe
>    fanatics.  We do not want to be seen chasing the _cause_ without
>    thinking its _consequence_ by doing this [7].
>  * No apologetic statement in SC.
>  * We had enough discussion on this subject and some of us are sick of
>    it.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> References and their links:
> [1]http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00307.html (Craig Sanders)
> [2] As I see as of Thu, 06 May 2004 23:35:31 +0200:
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00322.html (Raphael Hertzog)
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00329.html (Xavier Roche)
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00339.html (Wouter Verhelst)
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00393.html (Osamu Aoki)
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00421.html (Marco d'Itri, need to be signed)
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00422.html (Davide G. M. Salvetti)
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00423.html (Raul Miller)
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00427.html (Hamish Moffatt)
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/05/msg00089.html (Andreas Barth)
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/05/msg00075.html (Theodore
>  Ts'o, sig?)
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/05/msg00097.html (David N. Welton, DD?)
> [3]Anthony Towns: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00074.html
> [4]The current situation over Debian in general is summarized by 
>    Ian Jackson:
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/05/msg00060.html
> [5]Although the fact that data, font, and documentation were not
>    restricted to be DSFG is obvious in the old SC since:
>      Old SC: Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software,
>      New SC: Debian Will Remain 100% Free.
>    Whether the firmware is software or not is a debatable one if the
>    word "software" is taken out of context.  But it is clear that the
>    intent of 1997 SC did not consider the firmware component as a
>    software which is required to be DSFG free.  This historical
>    perspective is the key here.  See:
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/05/msg00015.html
> [6]For example, change in SC section 3 from "immediately" to "promptly"
>    by itself can be a reasonable one to reflect our delay in the actual
>    process.
> [7]The interesting message with respect to the Freedom and Usefulness.
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/04/msg00205.html 
>       (Theodore Ts'o)
> [8]Post-sarge situation and sarge-ignore are discussed:
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/05/msg00089.html
> Osamu

craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>

The next time you vote, remember that "Regime change begins at home"

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: