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

Re: Ready to vote on 2004-003?

On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 05:15:24PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> It seems to me that people from this set are asking Anthony to tell them
> which of the proposed amendements "address the issues".

Which is _precisely_ the wrong way of dealing with this. If you want me
to tell you want to think, that's fine: let's get rid of this whole GR
process and make me supreme dictator for life. If you want to keep the
power to overrule my decisions, or direct my efforts, then you need to
be able to judge things competently, such as the implications of the
social contract.

> Anthony has already stated that under the old social contract he felt
> these packages could be distributed and under the new social contract
> he felt they couldn't.  So it's not clear what question remains.

The question isn't what I think, it's what the project thinks. Before
the GR, the project leadership -- for this issue, the DPL, the archive
administrators, and the release manager -- were unanimous in thinking the
previous release policy was sound; various subscribers to debian-legal
disagreed. I don't think the previous release policy is sound any
longer, and in spite of my comments last month, nobody has come up with a
particularly sound counterargument, and presumably if I were wrong about
that and someone had, they'd have put that to the technical committee
to avoid any "bogus" sentiment that might be clouding my judgement. That
hasn't happened, however.

So, what _do_ you think? What's the right thing for the social contract
to promise? Stuff we can deliver now, or stuff we hope to be able to
deliver soon? What's the right way to make the decision on what the
social contract means? By amending the SC, by interpretative GR, by DPL
pronouncement, by delegate interpretation, by debian-legal consensus?
If the social contract we've got now is a mistake, are we served by
immediately breaking that commitment? Is the social contract we've got
now a mistake? If it's a mistake now, under what circumstances will it
become sensible?

Frankly, I'm tired of the fucking accusations being levelled at me for
incompetence or insincerity or moral decrepitude or whatever whenever I
participate in these discussions, so you guys are going to have to work
out the answers for yourselves for once.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
Don't assume I speak for anyone but myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking
  for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: