Re: Call for votes
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 10:19:40PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:02:11 -0700, Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 10:41:24AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > As I mentioned previously, I don't think point 3. here is the
> > compromise I would like to see. "Without further conditions" is so
> > broad that it seems to even *require* us to include firmware in main
> > that lacks any sort of proper distribution license. And indeed, the
> > upload of a completely unpruned 2.6.18 package to unstable suggests
> > that this is not an accident of wording, but the actual view of the
> > present kernel team.
> > If this option appears on a ballot alone, I am likely to vote
> > "further discussion" on it and encourage others to do so as well. I
> > don't want this GR to be a *mandate* that the release team allow
> > firmware under clearly non-free licenses into main for etch.
> Why not amend the proposal, then?
> This is a formal proposal to amend Frederik's proposak, and
> replace the third clause as below (only the third clause is changed,
> and the only change is to ensure we have the right to distribute the
> software in question). I am asking Frederik to accept this
> amendment, failing which, I am also seeking formal seconds for this.
Two questions here.
First, this means that this proposal needs seconds, right ? Or can Frederik
just incorporate it into his proposal ?
> | 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
> | community (Social Contract #4);
> | 2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress in the kernel
> | firmware issue; however, it is not yet finally sorted out;
> | 3. We give priority to the timely release of Etch over sorting every
> | bit out; for this reason, we will treat removal of sourceless
> | firmware as a best-effort process, and deliver firmware in udebs as
> | long as it is necessary for installation (like all udebs), and
> | firmware included in the kernel itself as part of Debian Etch,
> | as long as we are legally allowed to do so, and the formware is
> | distributed under a DFSG free license.
I will let Frederik comment, but this ammendment is a total reversal of the
proposition, doesn't allow for a "timely release of etch", so contradicts
itself, and is just the status quo anyway. I seriously doubt that this is what
Steve wants, but i don't really know what steve wants.
Steve, what is it you really want to happen, so we can then draft words which
fullfill the spirit of what you want, and which you will be able to second.