On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 20:33, Bernhard R. Link <brl...@debian.org> wrote: > * Sandro Tosi <mo...@debian.org> [081218 18:11]: >> But that will delay even further Lenny release; > > Hey! You suggested to redo something. Thus you are suggesting to delay.
But maybe with the aim of a better target? >> I think that a simple >> vote like the one dato proposed is what is needed to let us move >> forward a release. > > Please note that changing the vote changes the output. and don't we want it? don't we want to know if we can release lenny with blobs or release without it (just to make an example)? > And while the > current vote might be strange, the simplified vote only makes sense if > you want a very specific outcome, thus is much worse and extremly > undemocratic. ehm? what? how is it un-democratic to have different votes for different things, targetted exactly to decide where something is allowed or not? the specific outcome I want it to be sure that whatever the ballot results will be, we then know *exactly* what to do for lenny, something I don't believe it could be archive with the current ballot. Politely, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, Morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
