On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 11:38:33AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >Ansgar <ansgar@debian.org> writes: > >> Seconded. > >> One suggestion: if we modify the Social Contract then we can as well >> include "non-free-firmware" explicitly as well, i.e., replace > >> We have created "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our archive for >> these works. > >> by > >> We have created "contrib", "non-free-firmware" and "non-free" >> areas in our archive for these works. > >I considered doing this, but then I decided against it because I think the >current wording implicitly allows for there being multiple non-free areas. >I know that's not how we're currently reading it, and probably not how it >was intended, but one can interpret the same sentence as saying there is >one or more contrib area and one or more non-free area. > >I like that a little better since it avoids having to update a foundation >document for what's essentially bookkeeping. Suppose, for example, that >we want to split out some other bit of non-free in the future for some >non-SC-related reason (contrib or non-free debug symbols or whatever). It >feels weird to have to amend the SC just to add the new name to a list. Right. Maybe it might be helpful to tweak the wording the *other* way then, something like: We have created extra areas in our archive for these works. so we don't specify the areas explicitly? Just a thought... -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com "I can't ever sleep on planes ... call it irrational if you like, but I'm afraid I'll miss my stop" -- Vivek Das Mohapatra
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature