Re: Ready to vote on 2004-003?
On Wed, 19 May 2004 21:23:12 -0400, Raul Miller <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 05:55:35PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> >> The fact there was a precedent for this? When we first adopted
>> >> the DFSG, we did not throw out everything all at once -- indeed,
>> >> there was a release within a few days of adoption of the DFSG,
>> >> and that release certainly did not meet the DFSG and the new
>> >> social contract.
> In other words, with the new social contract, there should be no
> problem releasing Sarge with GFDL and other such stuff in main?
Sure, since we were practically at the brink of releasing
Sarge, anyway, and, as I said in the proposal life does not stop
just because we changed a foundation document.
> On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 07:22:08PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> As I mentioned in -ctte; I think this is for the whole project
>> membership to decide. Proposal E is essentially a formalized
>> grandfathering guideline.
> In other words, the Technical Committee shouldn't say that, with the
> new social contract, there should be no problem releasing Sarge with
> GFDL and other such stuff in main?
I think that this is not something the tech ctte needs to
hand to the project from up on high. I believe that we ought to
continue to support users, bug fixes, overdue releases, etc. while
we work towards changing stuff to meet the new SC --- however, this
is something we need to get a buy in from the majority of the
There is a time and a place for tech ctte to take things into
its own hands, but, this, I think, is not such a time.
To accuse others for one's own misfortunes is a sign of want of
education. To accuse oneself shows that one's education has begun. To
accuse neither oneself nor others shows that one's education is
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C