Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR
On Fri, Dec 19 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2008, Matthew Johnson wrote:
>> On Fri Dec 19 14:24, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> > It is. Does the resolution say what the new version of the foundation
>> > document will look like if it's accepted ? If yes, then it supersedes the
>> > document. Otherwise it doesn't.
>> So, if someone proposes a GR saying "we will ship the binary NVidia
>> drivers in main and make them the default so that people can use compiz"
>> but doesn't say they are overriding the DFSG or provide the wdiff for it
>> then that's fine and only needs 1:1 to pass?
> But try it, you will see that it won't even get the required seconds to
> start the vote. And if it does, it will largely fail anyway.
> As I said, we all have agreed to abide by the social contract, you'd need
> a serious rationale to convince me that this is coherent with our
> long-term goal.
Hmm. All that says is that you have drawn the line at one
point, not that the project has. I find it hard to see how shipping
non-free blobs in main is coherent with our long-term goal; but
obviously people in the project do not. Therefore, I find it
unconvincing to say that people will behave or vote a particular way.
> Either we trust the democracy or we don't. The 3:1 ratio is not here to
> protect us from insanity, it's only a matter of making sure that we all
> agree if we want to change the direction in which we're headed.
My take on it was that if we resolve to do something that is
contradiction of the foundation document, the only logical way to
interpret that is to accept that we are, if only temporarily, changing
the direction we are headed in. We might intend to turn back to the
path later, but for not, the direction is being changed.
In Hollywood, if you don't have happiness, you send out for it. Rex Reed
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C