On Mon, Oct 27 2008, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 09:04:33PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
>>
>> I propose the following alternatative to "Option 2" (removes last sentence):
>
> Or rather, I propose the following alternative which incorporates Manoj's
> rewritten #2 (in addition to removing the last sentence in #4):
>
> 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; most of the issues that were outstanding at the time of the
> last stable release have been sorted out. However, new issues in the
> kernel sources have cropped up fairly recently, and these new issues
> have not yet been addressed.
>
> 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.
>
> (Since this option overrides the SC, I believe it would require 3:1 majority)
In case there was any doubt, I second this altered proposal as
well.
manoj
--
<< WAIT >>
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Attachment:
pgpSHjE5_5CEL.pgp
Description: PGP signature