Re: Call for seconds: post-Lenny enforceability of DFSG violations
> > Is this intended to bypass the NEW process currently done by ftpmasters
> > any time something is added to non-free?
> ACK about your concerns (and the ones pointed by others, which are roughly
> the same). Do you have any suggestion on what would be a better approach?
Well, unless you explicitly want to undermine the authority of
ftpmaster over NEW processing, which I do not advise[*], I would say
"...may be done by any developer, subject to verification by the
I think this makes it clear that the NEW processing that happens as a
result of adding something to non-free would _not_ be bypassed in this
case - unless, of course, the ftpmasters actually want that.
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/
[*] It is absurd to even _have_ mandatory NEW processing by ftpmasters
if we don't trust them to use it correctly in the cases covered by