On 03/17/2012 05:20 AM, Ben Finney wrote: > > 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?
Ah, got it. I was asking about any of the variations involving upstart. But, I think Philip's right, that there's a significant difference between supporting it as an alternative and choosing it as a default. > I'm only pointing out that the contributor agreement requirement imposed > by Canonical is, as you asked, IMO a significant part of the > controversy. Okay, thanks, that's useful. Allison -- 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/4f64d931.8030...@lohutok.net
