Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR

[Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>]

[ MFU debian-vote@ ]

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> [   ] Choice 1: Reaffirm the Social Contract

 I'm fine with reaffirming the social contract.

> [   ] Choice 2: Allow Lenny to release with proprietary firmware [3:1]
> [   ] Choice 3: Allow Lenny to release with DFSG violations [3:1]
> [   ] Choice 4: Empower the release team to decide about allowing DFSG violations [3:1]

 I want these three too.

> [   ] Choice 5: Assume blobs comply with GPL unless proven otherwise

 I strongly disagree with this.

> [   ] Choice 6: Exclude source requirements for firmware (defined) [3:1]

 I support this proposal; even if I understand it will not bring us very
 far and we'd have better use of our time than fighting this over.

> [   ] Choice 7: Further Discussion


 This ballot is nonsense:
   a) I want to decide on requirements of source of firmwares AND allow
      lenny to release with DFSG violations AND "proprietary" firmware
      AND empower the release team to release with DFSG violations
   b) why have a "reaffirm the social contract" option when we have
      "further discussion"?  We all agreed to honor the social contract
      anyway.

 Apart of the noise of choice 1, this ballot doesn't empower us to
 decide on the 4 different questions.

 So I understand that we intend to honor all choices which beat NOTA,
 i.e. not only the highest ranked choice.

   Bye
-- 
Loïc Minier