Re: Analysis of the ballot options
* Chris Cheney (firstname.lastname@example.org) [040620 19:40]:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 10:59:44AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Are you dumb or a lying? Again: Our users are served good by:
> > - a current stable release
> > - free software
> > At the moment, we don't have any of them. Our stable release contains
> > items which are non-free, according to your interpretation of the
> > social contract (have you ever taken a look to
> > /usr/share/info/gcc-295.info.gz on a woody system?).
> > For someone who lives in the real world, and where time does matter,
> > I'm convinced that we should release now, and that also our social
> > contract encourages this. You may of course disagree, but please stop
> > ad-hominem attacks, and malicious gossip. Thanks.
> You're real world doesn't look like mine at least unless you intend to
> release Sarge with nearly 300 RC bugs? By the time all those RC bugs
> are fixed we could easily have removed all the non-free software from
> Debian main as well...
I consider the opinion of the release managers to be a better guide on
what blocks the release of sarge than my opinion or a glance at the RC
bug count. Please see e.g. Colin Watsons mail on
| > This is not the only thing holding up sarge.
| It's the biggest, and crucially it's the showstopper with the greatest
| uncertainty attached to it. People who've done any release management
| know that you need to resolve the items with the greatest uncertainty as
| early as possible; it is not possible to plan otherwise. (This is why
| there's been no release plan posted lately, because we basically
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C