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

Re: Proposal G

* Manoj Srivastava (srivasta@debian.org) [040603 06:10]:
> On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 03:09:16 +0200, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> 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
>  promise. 

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
>  front.

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

Reply to: