Re: Proposal G
* Manoj Srivastava (firstname.lastname@example.org) [040603 06:10]:
> On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 03:09:16 +0200, Florian Weimer <email@example.com> said:
> > * Manoj Srivastava:
> >>> For our users, we promise to do regular releases; as a guideline,
> >>> a major release of the distribution should happen about once a
> >>> year.
> >> On what basis do you think we can make this promise?
> > On the same basis that we promise not to hide bugs? Or not to rely
> We first put a public BTS in place, and _then_ we made the
Actually, we hide security bugs. Of course not, if they are filled
into the bts, but we hide them if they are sent to team@security.
Please don't misunderstand me; I think the current approach is the
right one, but with literal reading SC #3 is tangled (and I know that
Florian disagrees with me here).
> >> That policy violates the SC. You essentially told a delegate to go
> >> violate the social contract, and I don't think we can do that.
> > Ahem, this proposal tries to assure a delegate that his scruples are
> > unwarranted and that he should go on as previously planned. After
> But the SC plainly states that his scruples are
> warranted. You may chose to overrule the SC, but please say so up
I just disagree with you, and I don't think that we may be able to
agree here. That's the reason why I ask the developers to decide about
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C