Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 08:49:10PM +0900, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org> wrote:
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Choice 5: Assume blobs comply with GPL unless proven otherwise
> > Why GPL ? Why not BSD ? Why not "DFSG" ?
> I believe this is because the GPL requires source code to be
> distributed and therefore for the kernel to be distributable with
> embedded binary firmware, we have to assume that the "source code" of
> the firmware is the firmware itself. This makes it explicit that we
> consider binary blobs to be "source code" until proven otherwise.
No; it's because Manoj in his dual role as proposer and secretary has
imposed an incorrect title for that ballot option that does not match the
text of the ballot option, over various objections.
> > This vote is nonsensical, and I'm hereby calling people to rank FD first
> > or to boycott it. This is a practical joke.
> I plan to do something similar.
Boycotting is unlikely to prevent all ballot options from reaching the
quorum requirements, and given the inconsistent application of supermajority
requirements by the secretary it is possible that the vote outcome, as
determined by the secretary, will not match what the outcome would have been
on the same ballot with consistent supermajority requirements.
The only way to avoid this is by exercising your franchise and voting your
preference. If that means voting FD first in your case, that's reasonable,
but unless you're equally happy to see any of the proposed GRs pass, please
take the time to understand and rank the other ballot options. Condorcet is
a nice voting system, but it can't prevent undesired outcomes caused by
voter apathy and low voter turnout.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Reply to: