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

Re: Firmware & Social Contract: GR proposal

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.

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

>  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.

>   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.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: