[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, Aug 25, 2006 at 04:34:44PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 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?

Because it was specified that *no other GR* would change this.  You can't
legislate that, it's entirely up to the developers at the time to decide
whether or not they pass another GR --- and a later GR would certainly
supersede the earlier one.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Reply to: