On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 11:56:23PM +0200, Bart Martens wrote: >On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 08:25:44PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> >> No, it doesn't. > >> Your words may cover where those packages are *today*, > >Exactly. > >> but they most likely will *not* be in "non-free" when we come to make >> the changes. "non-free-firmware" != "non-free". > >I understood that part. > >> Please tweak your >> wording to be more flexible and cover what we're aiming to do. > >I think we have a different view on which proposal is the most flexible. And I >understand that you want my proposal to cover what you are aiming at. Bart, I genuinely don't understand why you're so wedded to this specific wording even after multiple people have tried to explain the problems they see here. Do you have a particular beef with the non-free-firmware section? As written, I believe your ballot option will cause more confusion and problems down the line. Therefore, regretfully I have to withdraw my seconding of your ballot option. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com Getting a SCSI chain working is perfectly simple if you remember that there must be exactly three terminations: one on one end of the cable, one on the far end, and the goat, terminated over the SCSI chain with a silver-handled knife whilst burning *black* candles. --- Anthony DeBoer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature