Allison Randal <alli...@lohutok.net> writes: > On 03/16/2012 06:50 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > Allison Randal <alli...@lohutok.net> writes: > > > Hypothetically, if this went away, > > > would it have a substantial impact on the decision? > > Which decision in particular, and by who? > > Anthropologically speaking, folkmoot is […] but I'd say the "decision" > is more a matter of who volunteers to do what. > > Does that sound about right?
I don't know what you're asking, which is why I asked you for clarification of what you mean. You asked “if this [requirement for the Canonical contributor agreement before accepting contributions in ‘upstart’] went away, would it have a substantial impact on the decision?” and I don't know what “the decision” you're referring to is. There are several being discussed, to be decided by different parties, as summarized by Lars Wirzenius. Which one are you asking about? > > If the Canonical contributor agreement were no longer required for > > contributions to a work, then depending on that work for core Debian > > features would be significantly less controversial, IMO. Does that > > answer your question? > > Yes, thanks. So, the contributor agreement is a factor, but not the only > factor (or even the primary factor). That's not a good conclusion from what I'm saying. I don't know enough about the issues that might be relevant for ‘upstart’ in Debian to be exhaustive; there may be many more, there many be a few more, or there may be only one. I'm only pointing out that the contributor agreement requirement imposed by Canonical is, as you asked, IMO a significant part of the controversy. -- \ “It's easy to play any musical instrument: all you have to do | `\ is touch the right key at the right time and the instrument | _o__) will play itself.” —Johann Sebastian Bach | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87bonvo1uh....@benfinney.id.au
