Re: Ready to vote on 2004-003?
> > > A part of the project is trying to send you the message that they want
> > > you to release sarge on the original timescale, irrespective of
> > > whether it gets completely purged of the non-free things that your
> > > interpretation of the previous SC did not consider DFSG-critical.
> On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 12:42:53PM -0400, Raul Miller <firstname.lastname@example.org> was heard to say:
> > So why don't any of the proposed GRs say this?
On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 01:45:40PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> Could you explain why this paragraph in proposal E is
> " In the specific case of General Resolution 2004_003, since that
> release currently in preparation, code named "Sarge", is very close to
> release, and the previously released version is quite out of date, our
> commitment to our users dictates that the "Sarge" release should go on
> as planned - even while we are in the process of reaching compliance
> with the new Social Contract. This exemption for "Sarge" applies to
> security releases and point releases as well."
That one is fine -- I just forgot about that part of it.
This is good enough that I'm now thinking I don't need to propose a