> > If someone were to implement a decent alternative for that infrastructure, > > I would be amenable to leaving that part out of the social contract, > > but I do not like your "drop it on the floor" approach to this issue.
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 02:46:52PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote: > That's half the point. You can vote on it when the ballot goes out. Mind including some meaningful content with your words? > > Furthermore, I think it's important to acknowledge that some of our > > users require the use of non-DFSG software, and to support that use. > > See clause 1, last sentence. Clause 5 is redundant in this respect. Hmm... ok, I could live with that. However, if your sole purpose is to mess things up... well... I guess I would just live with your brush offs, and vote against your "drop things on the floor" proposal. Could you tell me about the plan for dealing with contrib and non-free? I don't really care whether those are "a part of the debian project" or "not a part of the debian project". However, I very much do care that they exist, and that they continue to exist. For example, if I see a real and inclusive effort to set up a separate "project" to maintain and support contrib and non-free -- one we could perhaps link to from distrib/netinst (one I could join, if I so desired) -- I'd have no objection whatsoever to voting for a proposal to drop clause 5 from the social contract (thus allowing this hypothetical "other project" to take over contrib and non-free). Thanks, -- Raul
