Re: Preparing linux-2.6 2.6.18-1
Note to list-masters:
Please circumvent the ban on me for debian-release, and have the integrity
of my mails concerning this thread reach that mailing list too for
completeness of this rather important discussion. -- Thanks.
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 02:58:31AM -0500, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 08:52:15AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > There won't be any GR, there will be a new pet proposal until forever, and
> > endless discussions as we start recalling the DPL, and bashing on the
> > secretary and what not.
>
> In the absence of GR, the current situation is that sourceless
> firmwares are not allowed in main. This is the reason the RM
> proposed this GR in the first place.
The current consensus is that it is well among the power of the RMs to ignore
a number of bugs for the sarge release, including this one. It would still be
a bug, naturally, but one we cannot fix in a timely way for the etch release,
but have every intention of tacklink for etch+1.
> Re-adding them at this stage
> 1) is against the current social contract
Yes, but then so is shipping the firmware actually still in main, and i guess
one could evoke the "won't discriminate" clause of the SC/DFSG, in order to
ship all of them, or none of them, but not the current mess. Furthermore, it
has been claimed that the current pruning script is less than technically
perfect, and more work than what it is worth to maintain.
Now, as said, this is a step back to better jump, and the real solution on
this is to follow on with what has been done (by upstream) on the qlogic
drivers, whose firmware is actually already in non-free, even though d-i
doesn't support it yet. This is an upstream work, and as thus will take time
to come to debian, but we, the debian kernel team (or at least me and
Frederik) take the engagement to work on this during etch+1 devel cycle. I
have strong faith in the integrity of Thomas, Larry and Nerode, and strongly
believe they, and other remove-non-free supporters, who will support us on
this.
> 2) will likely delay the release for most GR outcome, including no vote
> or futher discussion.
But due to everyone (including you), trying to pull the glory to themselves,
and proposing their pet GR to muddle the issue, without any respect for the
GRs proposed previously, and because of the loophole in the constitution,
there is probably no chance that there will be a meaningful vote any time
soon, and i don't believe that the actual climate, including those bass
accusations of abuse of power against our secretary, is prone to solve this
issue in a satisfactory way.
My proposal was to vote on :
http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2006/09/msg00062.html
ASAP, get the etch question out of the way, release etch, and engage in a
discussion on this issue which would culminate at the debconf'07 in a live
debate, as Anthony proposed. Even though there where enough seconds, there was
no action on this front, and i believe we could have has a vote a week or two
ago or someting, if i had understood Manoj rightly.
So, given the defaillance of the GR system, there is no point in worrying
about the vote or not, and always remember, that debian was at the base, and
still is to a mesure, a system where those who do the work get to do the
decision, so you know what you have to do if you want those firmwares not to
be in main :)
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: