Re: Ready to vote on 2004-003?
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) [040520 08:40]:
> On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 03:06:01PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Why isn't it sufficient that he's stated that his interpretation of
> > the old SC allowed some packages and his interpretation of the new SC
> > does not?
> For the whateverth time, it's the project's interpretation of the SC
> that's important, not mine. I don't believe it's possible to interpret
> the current SC to allow that policy; but I might be wrong.
I disagree. The SC still says that our priorities are our users and
the free software community. That there are no "Debian User
Interaction Guidelines" doesn't change that. So, if we have to either
neglect a bit the freeness in border cases (as Debian is about
creating a free operating system, hardware-specific low-level firmware
_is_ a border case), or to finally release sarge, I consider that the
SC gives us not only the right to release sarge now, but really tells
us to do it. (Especially, as most of the issues are also valid in
woody, so we don't do worse in relation of free software to release
now, but very good in relation to our users.)
This doesn't mean that I think these issues should be left
unaddressed, but just - that's now not the right moment in time to
address them.
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
Reply to: