Hi, I propose to amend the Robert's resolution by adding the following choice ----------- The Debian project, recognizing that bugs do not fix themselves, applauds Ben Hutchings's efforts to remove non-DFSG-conformant bits from the linux-2.6 package in a way that is still making users a priority. It instructs the project leader to authorize spending of Debian funds to send a box of chocolates to Ben. -----------
I belive that Robert's resolution is a waste of time in that it adds nothing but ineffective micromanaging for situation that is in violation of the today's social contract while being ignorant of the how its proposed solution should be implemented (currently packages move between components by entering NEW on upload and then being accepted or rejected, the proposal does not specify whose responsibility it is to do the upload, I know of no attempt to upload linux-2.6 to non-free, so really with the same set of actions and the new set of rules, the situation would be 100% identical). This failure and the lack of effort to actually resolve the situation within the current framework make Robert's proposal indefensible. Furthermore, I intend to ask the DPL to revoke my delegation to the ftp team should Robert's proposal receive enough seconds to be voted on.[1] Fianally, I would also like to ask the Secretary to clarify that Robert's Option 1 does affect the Social Contract #1, in particular We will never make the system require the use of a non-free component. when it requires moving to non-free packages from Debian such as the Linux kernel that are (effectively) required for running Debian. Kind regards T. 1. For me, Debian is non-fun at the moment not because of the lack of great people but because of an excess of people that spoil my Debian experience. I am not quite ready to quit yet, but every day and every second on Robert's resolution help. -- Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
