Re: call for seconds: on firmware
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 08:54:17AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Let me observe that the fact that "several people here think" is not
> That said, I disagree with point (ii) of your interpretation:
> > i Do we require source for firmware in main: Yes
> > ii Do we allow the Release Team to ignore SC violation bugs: No
> > iii What do we do for Lenny: Wait
> > iV Do we modify foundation documents: No
> > v Do we override foundation documents No
> it should rather be "Yes":
Instead of having a long, useless discussion on what "Further discussion"
means, would it be possible to remove that option?
Correct me if I am wrong, but I think for any interpretation of what "Further
Discussion" would mean in this vote, there's an explicit option in the ballot.
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."