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

Re: Proposal: Apologize for releasing etch with sourceless/non-free firmware

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 13:16:28 -0700, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> said: 

> On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 07:54:59PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
>> I'd add something to say that this is *really* the last time we
>> postpone the fixing of the issue and that no further GR should
>> change that.

> Why?  That can't possibly be binding?

        What makes you think that? The developers, by a GR, can
 preemptively take the release decision that etch + 1 would not be
 released with non-free software in the kernel, and that non-dfsg bits
 in main, which violate the SC, would, for once, actually be really
 considered RC.

        Why does this not fall under takeing decisions that the
 delegates are empowered to take bit?

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always
valuable. Thomas Jefferson
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: