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

Re: position statement from the kernel team over the current non-free firmware GR vote (Was: Call for votes for "GR: : Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel")



On Friday 13 October 2006 16:13, Sven Luther wrote:
> For all these reasons, the kernel team believes that the solution
> proposed at [3], and which already reached enough seconds, and will thus
> be needed to be voted on, is a better solution, and since it is not
> possible anymore to amend the current ballot,


> we urge all voters to vote "Further Discussion",

Why is this needed? Can't the new ballot be voted on anyway even if the 
current one is already accepted?

As the vote is already underway (and the voting period almost finished), it 
seems that this call for recasting votes *could* have very undesired 
effects depending on who decides to recast their votes and who not.
For example, I'd expect people who want a less restrictive solution for Etch 
to change their vote sooner than people who would prefer all firmware to be 
removed.

It seems to me changing votes is very ill-advised and I would therefore urge 
all voters to just vote the current ballot in the way they think best, 
looking only at the options available in the ballot and to not be 
distracted by things that may or may not happen later.
I at least will not change the vote I've already submitted.

I would also urge Sven to follow up to d-d-a to cancel his advice to voters 
to change their vote.

> and allow for the recast of a new ballot containing 
> the better solution, and possible other amendments (like a rewording of
> Josselin's proposal on top of the consensual proposal for example).

Cheers,
FJP

Attachment: pgpdjIg0mYXBw.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: