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

Re: Call for seconds: DFSG violations in Lenny

Hash: SHA1

Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com> writes:

> I propose the following General Resolution.  If you wish to second only one
> or two of the options, please indicate which ones clearly, so the Secretary
> can account them separately.
> Option 1 (reaffirm the Social Contract)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>    1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
>       community (Social Contract #4);
>    2. Given that we have known for two previous releases that we have
>       non-free bits in various parts of Debian, and a lot of progress has
>       been made, and we are almost to the point where we can provide a
>       free version of the Debian operating system, we will delay the
>       release of Lenny until such point that the work to free the operating
>       system is complete.
> Option 2 (allow Lenny to release with propietary firmware)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>    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 assure the community that there will be no regressions in the progress
>       made for freedom in the kernel distributed by Debian relative to the Etch
>       release in Lenny
>    4. We give priority to the timely release of Lenny 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 Lenny, as long as we are legally
>       allowed to do so, and the firmware is distributed upstream under a
>       license that complies with the DFSG.
> (Since this option overrides the SC, I believe it would require 3:1 majority)

I hereby second both the first and second proposition

- -- 
Rémi Vanicat
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8+ <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>


Reply to: