Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations
On Fri, Oct 24 2008, Steve Langasek wrote:
> OTOH, I do understand the desire to put such (diminishing) exceptions
> to a referendum instead of leaving them implicit, and am happy to vote
> for a GR that makes clear to our users the state of affairs in lenny.
Well said. I think we should indeed have that GR.
> I also encourage the kernel team to pursue the patches that Ben
> Hutchings has so wonderfully provided for this latest round of bugs.
> They need to be weighed against the risk of regression, but they
> should still be considered for inclusion in lenny. Kudos to those who
> are actually doing the legwork to fix the bugs.
Is this being pursued? I have tested the kernel source Ben put
out, but my hardware is sadly mainstream and does not require the
modules in question, so my testing is of doubtful value.
Others may not understand that we must practice self-control, but
quarrelling dies away in those who understand this fact. 6
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C