Summary: you probably want 3 or 6. On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 12:59:33PM -0500, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > [ ] Choice 1: Postpone changes until September 2004 [needs 3:1] > [ ] Choice 2: Postpone changes until Sarge releases [needs 3:1] > [ ] Choice 3: Add apology to Social Contract [needs 3:1] > [ ] Choice 4: Revert to old wording of SC [needs 3:1] > [ ] Choice 5: "Transition Guide" foundation document [needs 3:1] > [ ] Choice 6: Reaffirm the current SC [needs 1:1] > [ ] Choice 7: Further discussion Options 1-3 are essentially clones with subtle variations. 2 is the same as 1, but without the time limit. 3 is the same as 2, but is less intrusive while still accomplishing the same goal - it doesn't mess with unrelated parts of the SC. (If you want 3 but with a time limit, vote for 'further discussion' and next time participate in the discussion instead of sitting around like a lemon) It is unfortunate that these three options were not combined, but there has been something of a buckshot approach to the construction of this ballot. Option 3 is essentially the refined version of 1 and 2. Option 5 may in itself be a good idea, but it is essentially orthogonal here, and worse, it doesn't actually answer the question of "what do we do about sarge?" - it just says "carry on", which says "non-free release" if you were expecting a non-free release and "free release" if you were expecting a free release. [I would tentatively support the notion of introducing something like option 5 as a separate ballot; it seems like a valid idea. But it's probably not a good idea to write this in a hurry, and I think it would be better written in the style of the constitution]. Option 6 is the other position - that free software is what matters. There are essentially two positions here, which appear to be best represented by options 3 and 6. In summary, these positions are: --- Debian is about releasing software --- Debian is about releasing free software --- If you think that it is more important to release some software than to release free software, you should probably rank 3 first. If you think that it is more important to have free software, you should probably rank 6 first. I would point out that historically, Debian does not release before it is ready, and that's why our releases usually work so well. Option 3 is the "release before it is ready, because releasing is more important than being ready" option. Option 6 is the "better rather than sooner" option. On a side note, there has been a meme floating around that says: "There is an inherant contradiction in the SC, between the needs of free software and the needs of our users. Both options are in conflict with the SC because one ignores free software, while the other ignores our users." The assumption here is that our users are not best served by free software. I question why anybody who holds that opinion would have anything to do with Debian, or free software in general. I think that our users are best served by having free software, and releasing with anything less is doing them a major disservice, especially if we foist non-free software on them for two or three years until the next release. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature