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

Re: Firmware & Social Contract: GR proposal

On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 08:14:42PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 11:26:59AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > Le mar 5 septembre 2006 09:44, Anthony Towns a ??crit :
> >   Those polls should never ever drive our choices. I've raised my
> > concerns with respect to those polls on -devel, and even asked you as
> > the DPL directly[1], mail that you swept away with disdain[2].
> I replied to it... If you wanted more information you could've followed
> up to the reply...
> >  1. I'm utterly frustrated with your ways. The mail on d-d-a could not
> >     have any other answer that "please release etch in time", that's
> >     something a perfect moron could have predicted without a doubt. 
> 26% of the people on the forums said supporting hardware requiring
> non-free firmware was the highest priority; another 15% said not shipping
> sourceless firmware in main was; that's 41% all up or 86 people.

For etch though.

> In the other poll, 18% of people (36 people) said delaying etch was the
> right solution.

Again for etch, not forever after.

> >  2. Your proposal does not reflect what many of the DDs think, or have
> >     discussed until now, whatever you claim. Only Don's proposal /may/
> >     result into delaying etch
> I have no idea what "many DDs think", that's why I wanted a poll to
> see if we really were going to aim to release etch on time, and if so
> whether we'd do that by dropping hardware support or not complying with
> the social contract.
> >  4. I know that many DD's had the same concerns about the potential
> >     politisations of those polls, or the risks to see them impact the
> >     GR, (or because they thought the issue was obvious) and didn't vote,
> >     and would refuse to.
> *shrug* If you don't vote, you don't get your opinion taken into
> account. That's not news.

Well, the correct way of discussing this kind of stuff, is to do so on
debian-vote, this is how our voting procedure goes.

> >   I strongly enjoin people not to second that proposal,
> Why? If the other proposals are better, they'll win when the final vote
> is taken anyway.

because we already have to many confunded proposals.


Sven Luther

Reply to: