-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 08:41:35PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: >> The Debian Project, >> >> affirming its committment to principles of freeness for all works it >> distributes, >> >> but recognizing that changing the Social Contract today would have grave >> consequences for the upcoming stable release, a fact which does not >> serve our goals or the interests of our users, >> >> hereby resolves: >> >> 1. that the amendments to the Social Contract contained within the >> General Resolution "Editorial Amendments To The Social Contract" >> (2004 vote 003) be immediately rescinded; >> 2. that these amendments, which have already been ratified by the Debian >> Project, will be reinstated effective as of September 1, 2004 without >> further cause for deliberation. > > > I wish to propose the following amendment: > > That point 2. above be changed to read: > > 2. that these amendments, which have already been ratified by the > Debian Project, will be reinstated immediately after the release of > the next stable version of Debian (codenamed sarge), without > further cause for deliberation. > > Rationale: > >> A fixed four month period should (based on current projections) give us >> ample time to release sarge, while not allowing so much time that >> maintainers are left to think that resolving the status of non-program >> components of Debian vis ? vis the DFSG is not an imminent concern. > > While a four month period should be enough time to release sarge, > without this amendment, we leave open the possibility that we do not > release in time and must repeat this process again. I think it's best > to declare explicitly how long this exception should remain in effect > rather than assume that we have picked a big enough window. Although > on the downside, it relieves some pressure to release sarge soon, but > it also prevents us from rushing to release by September 1 which may > result in an inferior product. > > I really hope that this amendment is not needed (i.e. we release by > September 1 anyways), but I think we should allow for the worst, just > in case. > > Steve (and all those who seconded the original resolution), I hope you > accept this amendment. Failing that, I would like to seek sponsors for > this amendment to the proposal. > I second this proposal, as amended. - -- Remi Vanicat -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iD8DBQFAj7gWsOGY15BXtdMRArHGAJwP0JmJ6+H7ez7nOk1OMEcyZKInwACfZ6GH dAM+z7vX9meqHpA/aHSLYhE= =/keI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
