[RFC] Alternative proposal: reaffirm upstream and maintainers technical competence over the software they maintain
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: [RFC] Alternative proposal: reaffirm upstream and maintainers technical competence over the software they maintain
- From: Luca Falavigna <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 11:14:22 +0200
- Message-id: <CADk7b0Pow2RnOo0A1PK8i8CGAO3KyvF3iDkUDje=N52BzDLreA@mail.gmail.com>
I'd like to draft an alternative proposal to the GR.
Would anybody consider it a nice addition to the proposals we
currently have, and eventually second it if I asked for it?
Of course, improvements to the text are much more than welcome!
** Begin Alternative Proposal **
Proposal: Reaffirm upstream and maintainers technical competence over
the software they maintain
Debian has decided (via the Technical Committee) to change its
default init system for the next release. The Technical Committee
decided not to decide about the question of "coupling" i.e. whether
other packages in Debian may depend on a particular init system.
This GR reaffirms the Debian Social Contract #4, in such a way
that Debian acknowledges the choices made by both the Software
Developers (also known as Upstream Developers) and the Debian
Package Maintainers to provide the best Free Software to our Users.
1. Exercise of the TC's power to set policy
For jessie and later releases, the TC's power to set technical
policy (Constitution 6.1.1) is exercised as follows:
2. Freedom of upstream discrection
Upstream Developers considering a specific Free Software (including,
but not limited to, a particular init system executed as PID 1)
fundamental to deliver the best Software releases, are fully entitled
to require, link, or depend on that Software, or portions of it.
3. Reaffirm Debian Maintainers goodwill
Debian Maintainers' work is aiming to respect the Debian Social
Contract, in such a way to provide our Users the best Free Software
4. Modifications to Upstream Software
Debian Maintainers are fully entitled to provide modifications to
the Free Software they maintain as per DFSG #3, if they judge this
necessary to provide the best software releases. On the other hand,
Debian Maintainers are fully entitled to adhere to Upstream's
decisions to require, link, or depend on a specific Free Software
(including, but no limited to, a particular init system executed as
PID 1), if they consider it necessary to prevent delivering broken,
buggy, or otherwise incomplete software packages.
5. Evidence of defects (bugs)
We strongly reaffirm Debian Maintainers are not deliberately hiding
problems (Social Contract #3). No technical decisions shall be
overruled if no proper evidence of defects, issued in the Debian Bug
Tracking system, is found. Fear, uncertainty, and doubt are not
considered as evidence of defects.
** End Proposal **