On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 06:50:08AM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote: > Raul has added several strong guarantees of effort on the part of > Debian, which do not presently exist. I strongly oppose these. As a > maintainer with no packages in non-free, I refuse to do any of these > things. The constitution (3.1.1) trumps the social contract here, so > these statements are non-operative - they do not describe what > developers do, and they cannot compel developers to do these things. > > The current clause 5 of the social contract accurately describes my > position, as somebody who has little or nothing to do with > non-free. Raul's proposed amendment does not. I think that a majority > of the developers will be in a similar position.
That argument would make sense if you were the only person in the project. But the project as a whole can have goals which individual developers do not pursue. > We only accepted the LSB on the proviso that it would not interfere > with other packages - that it could be handled entirely by the people > who were interested in supporting LSB applications. I object to any > proposal to expand it beyond this. You seem to be asserting that we, as a project, shouldn't recognize such standards violations as bugs. This seems to conflict with part 1 of the social contract which [at least currently] says that we "support our users who develop and run non-free software on Debian". Note also that I removed the reference to LSB. - Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
