[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Q to all candidates: dropping SC §5

>>>>> "Stefano" == Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> writes:

    Stefano> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 09:31:03AM +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote:
    >> So, the only way I could see the drop of SC §5 as a worthwhile goal,
    >> is if we also removed non-free (and possibly contrib) too.

    Stefano> I respect this point of view, even though I disagree with it: I think it
    Stefano> is desirable to drop SC §5, without (at least at the same time) dropping
    Stefano> contrib/non-free from our infrastructure.

    Stefano> But let's embrace your point of view for now! It seems to me that doing
    Stefano> so result in the impossibility to *ever* drop SC §5. Because:

    Stefano> - The only way to drop SC §5 is by voting, and we know from experience
    Stefano> that voting on something does not make the needed volunteer to
    Stefano> implement the vot (= getting rid of contrib/ non-free) magically
    Stefano> appear out of thin air.

    Stefano> - On the other hand, contrib/non-free cannot be removed while SC §5 is
    Stefano> still around.

    Stefano> Should I conclude that you consider impossible to ever drop
    Stefano> SC §5?

No, not quite. I very much would like to drop it, along with non-free,
and I believe that there will be a time, hopefully in the not too
distant future, where we may be able to do that. Over the past few
years, from my point of view, we've been getting closer and closer.

They should be dropped at the same time, because removing only one makes
- in my opinion - little sense. Mind you, dropping contrib / non-free
does not need to happen immediately. A commitment that we'll do it at
some point is good enough for me, so we don't have to pull volunteers
out of a magic hat.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: