Re: _Our_ resolution merely affirms the status quo
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 01:03:43AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I'm disappointed at the amount of nonsense being posted in this thread
> along the following lines:
>
> But this is no excuse for arguing the legal technicalities (`what does
> the Social Contract mean') as opposed to the moral/practical issues
> (`should we release Sarge in this state, or delay') !
I posted a comment a long time ago, which might bear repeating
(something close to the text below IIRC).
The Debian developers changed their policy and fundamental documents
when the Sarge release was 90% complete. It would be inequitable to
release Sarge under the changed terms and conditions. Accordingly,
we choose to release the Sarge release under the same Social Contract
and DFSG as were in place for the Woody release.
[The key word here is probably inequitable - we can't hold a whole
release to something we only agree to close to the end. I'm not
suggesting this as binding precedent for any future release - lets
just ship Sarge OK?]
FWIW, Steve Macintyre and a couple of others appeared to agree.
Lets ship the bloody release - we're at rc1 of the installer which
is what seems to have held us up for so long. I'm already hearing
nay sayers telling me that Debian won't release before 2005 at the
earliest. Let's prove them wrong :)
>
Reply to: