On 24/03/21 4:26 am, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Hello, > > I hope not to be too inflamatory with this. As you are surely aware, > last week Richard Stallman was reinstated as part of the Board of > Directors of the FSF. That is something deeply disturbing and > confidence-shattering for many of us. > > Some people have moved to action -- if nothing more, at least to > express they are disgusted with the turn of events, and to say the > organizations they represent believe it to be detrimental to the FSF's > own image and projection into the future. Particularly, I mean the > following two pages, of very different nature: > > https://opensource.org/OSI_Response > https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ > > Now, as for my question: I thought repeatedly over the last couple of > days whether to start something like this in Debian... But, what would > it take for the project to issue a statement in this line? Would we > have to pass a GR? > > I am sure there is a precedent of a position statement being announced > without having a formal vote about it, but I cannot find it at the > moment. Sruthi, Jonathan: What is your take on this? If you were a DPL > today, would you feel OK issuing a position statement on behalf of the > project?
In this particular instance, I personally agree with your views and I believe Debian should have a position statement. I think for position statements, we should have a GR and if I was a DPL, I would have proposed one by now. If there is a possibility to issue a statement without a formal vote, I would have initiated an initial discussion on -private and went ahead with a short statement first and a detailed version after the GR. > ... > (And yes, with this I am probably forcing you to disclose a position > on the subject... I'm sorry for that. But I think that, as a candidate > for the DPL position, knowing your position on the issue also makes > sense) I am more than happy to share my position on this. :)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
