Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR
On Thursday 18 December 2008 11:45, Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>
wrote:
> Margarita Manterola wrote:
> > If we do all this, we would be voting:
> >
> > A) If we trust or not the release team on making the right choices of
> > which bugs to ignore and which not (regardless of this being firmware
> > issues or what have you). This is from now on, not just for Lenny.
> >
> > B) If we want to allow sourceless firmware in Debian, defining
> > firmware in a way that doesn't give a waiver to anything else without
> > source. This is also from now on, not just for Lenny. But it's only
> > for firmware, not for everything with licensing problems.
> >
> > C) If we want to allow stuff with some problems into Lenny, as we
> > already did for Sarge and Etch.
>
> My suggestion would be to vote for (C) first, and then decide the
> wording on (A) and (B) depending on the outcome of (C). In which case,
> even if there is a conflict, the wording can clarify if the second vote
> overrides or doesn't override the first result.
This makes sense to me.
I would like to see the current vote abandoned. Manoj said that this will be
done if there is sufficient grass-roots support. We have had a series of
blog posts on Planet Debian from people who don't like the current vote. I
like Brian's idea (or something similar).
It seems that the grass-roots support for doing something quite different to
the current vote includes me, Brian, and quite a few bloggers on Planet
Debian.
--
russell@coker.com.au
http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Main Blog
http://doc.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog
Reply to: