On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 10:43:47AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > I would strongly disagree. The developers can certainly pass > another GR, but the tech ctte should not override the wishes of the > develoeprs when this is not a technical issue at hand.
The technical committee is empowered to make a decision when asked, see 6.1(3). Dear technical ctte, if you are able to come to a conclusion on this topic, please make a decision as to whether the social contract requires non-free documentation, firmware, etc to be removed from main before release. You've thus been asked, and thus been empowered to consider the issue as you see fit. If individuals on the technical ctte do not wish to take part in such a discussion, or do not wish to make a decision, or wish to defer to my previously mentioned decision, or whatever else, that's fine, naturally. I don't see much point in arguing about procedural technicalities though. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> Don't assume I speak for anyone but myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Protect Open Source in Australia from over-reaching changes to IP law http://www.petitiononline.com/auftaip/ & http://www.linux.org.au/fta/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
