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

Re: Proposed GR: State exception for security bugs in Social Contract clause 3

Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> writes:

> For the record, I do not take Gunnar to be at any fault here.  However,
> it is true that had Gunnar not expected my GR to be uncontroversial, I
> probably wouldn't have proposed it.

> While I stand by my GR in principle, I agree with those who have said
> that it is not worth spending time on something like this unless it's
> going to pass without opposition.  Since this GR /has/ turned out to be
> quite controversial, I hereby withdraw it.

To say very explicitly, particularly since you just became a DD
(congratulations and welcome!), there was absolutely nothing wrong with
you proposing this here!  It turned out to not be something that people
generally got behind, but that happens, and this is totally the sort of
thing we should be able to talk about as a project and understand.

And even without amending the foundation documents, if anyone ever *is*
bothered by this statement, we now have a recent thread that we can point
them at that says quite a lot about how the project thinks about this

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: