Re: Q to all candidates: dropping SC §5
Stefano Zacchiroli <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> You seem to view dropping SC §5 as something potentially catastrophic
> from the technical side, for enterprise and large-scale deployments. But
> at the same time you acknowledge changing domain names as a way to go
> about it. Surely if we do that change the catastrophe won't happen then?
Either we're separating the project infrastructure or we're not. If we're
not, renaming everything while running it the same way it runs now is
rather pointless. If we are, I think that's potentially catastrophic.
I have a hard time imagining that we would go to all the effort to change
domain names and leave literally everything else the same. If that's all
we do, that's not a catastrophe, but it's annoying churn for our users and
seems quite pointless to me.
> It'll be just a matter of for how long we can keep the old URLs
> working---and the answer can very well be "forever".
If we're going to keep the old URLs working forever, there's a really
quite trivial way to do that. Don't make new URLs. :)
Basically, my feeling is that any meaningful change that would have enough
of a point to be worth investing effort into is going to be potentially
> The answers to this question (including those from candidates who didn't
> or won't really answer) speak volumes about candidates' views on broad
> Free Software philosophy/politics, and where in their opinion Debian
> should stand within those spectrum.
I actually don't agree with this either, really. But I think you and I
agreed to disagree on this a while back. :)
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>