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 Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 05:14:21PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> 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?
Not with the current wording, accordying to Manoj. If Choice 1. passes, the we
will have to amend the second proposal accordyingly, but this is an attempt
not to do so.
Also, considering the confusion involving the wording of the short
description, we will have the same mess as in the "cosmetic changes" days,
which i believe is not a good thing.
> 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.
Well, voting the two proposals in order of preferance but below FD, should
have no ill effect.
> 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.
Which in itself lends strength to the claim that the wording of the short
description is misleading, right ?
> 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.
And how much of that is directly correlated to your anti-sven campaign ?
Has has repeteadly been the case these past few month, your prejudice is
showing, and you don't lose an occasion to bash on me, right ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: