Hi,
The draft ballot for this vote is appended. Please note that
this is a draft ballot, voting has not yet started. For operational
reasons, I have decided to start and end the vote in the middle of the
weekend (I am not able to guarantee being able to meet a schedule
during the week
Anthony Towns writes:
> I believe that distributing firmware written in chunks of hex is in
> compliance with the GPL, and repetition of your arguments isn't going
> to change that belief.
Do you really think that the GPL contains an exception for firmware
blobs? Or that the GPL doesn't mean wh
Frank -
> the ftpmasters and many others want to give those drives the
> benefit of doubt and assume that they aren't sourceless, but are, e.g.,
> just dumps of unnamed registers and therefore "the preferred form for
> modification". After all, they were what was given to the kernel people
> when
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 12:12:04 -0500, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 23:20:35 +0200, Denis Barbier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>> It seems more logical to me to have a separate ballot for the recall
>> vote;
> Apart from the fact that these are under separat
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:12:04PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 23:20:35 +0200, Denis Barbier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > It seems more logical to me to have a separate ballot for the recall
> > vote;
>
> Apart from the fact that these are under separate sectio
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006, Denis Barbier wrote:
> I am hereby calling for a vote on the recall resolution.
> As will be confirmed by Loic Minier in a separate mail, we
> agreed upon shortening the discussion and voting periods
> to one week, per delegation of the Debian Project Leader[1].
I confirm th
Le mercredi 04 octobre 2006 à 23:32 +0200, Loïc Minier a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> This is a call for a vote on the General Resolution: Re-affirm support
> to the Debian Project Leader.
>
> The proposed ballot is:
> [ ] Re-affirm DPL; wish success to unofficial Dunc Tank
> [ ] Re-aff
Hi,
This is a call for a vote on the General Resolution: Re-affirm support
to the Debian Project Leader.
The proposed ballot is:
[ ] Re-affirm DPL; wish success to unofficial Dunc Tank
[ ] Re-affirm DPL; do not endorse nor support his other projects
[ ] Further discussio
Hi,
I am hereby calling for a vote on the recall resolution.
As will be confirmed by Loic Minier in a separate mail, we
agreed upon shortening the discussion and voting periods
to one week, per delegation of the Debian Project Leader[1].
Of course, the voting period in the WML file will be edited
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 09:31:27PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> So the real question is whether we want to do that, whether in the
> particular cases there's in fact any doubt, etc.
A quick survey based on the size of the firmware blobs suggests 1/3 of them
may be register dumps, while 2/3 are mos
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 09:31:27PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> So, the RMs are making claims that those sourceless GPLed drivers
> >> don't cause any kind of distribution problem, while i strongly
> >> beli
On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 03:00:52PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As I currently understand it, the General resolution to recall
> the project leader stands with enough seconds; and that the requisite
> seconds were there on the 21st of September. One second was
> rescinded.
Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So, the RMs are making claims that those sourceless GPLed drivers
>> don't cause any kind of distribution problem, while i strongly
>> believe that the GPL clause saying that all the distribution rights
>> under t
Le mercredi 04 octobre 2006 à 12:12 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
> Which is better. But the consensus seems to be emerging that
> these are separate issues, an d separate ballots look like:
>
> [ ] Recall
> [ ] Do not recall
> [ ] FD
Whose proposal is "do not recall"? I'm afra
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, the RMs are making claims that those sourceless GPLed drivers
> don't cause any kind of distribution problem, while i strongly
> believe that the GPL clause saying that all the distribution rights
> under the GPL are lost if you cannot abide by all point
On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 23:20:35 +0200, Denis Barbier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> It seems more logical to me to have a separate ballot for the recall
> vote;
Apart from the fact that these are under separate sections of
the constitution (recall §4.1, position statement §4.5) and thus
argua
On Tuesday 03 October 2006 22:15, Sven Luther wrote:
> I hope this clarifies things for you and others.
Hah!
Thanks to you, Frans and the others who have tried to actually respond to my
question, but seeing the thread grow into yet another thread discussing the
issues at hand (and with a flamew
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 03:19:51PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Has anyone done a survey to see how many "do not modify" blobs
> >we are talking about here?
> Not counting files already removed in 2.6.17,
> drivers/net/appletalk/cops_ffdrv.h use-only (2)
> drivers/net/appletalk/cops_
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 06:12:38PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 07:20:35PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Anthony, this is bullshit.
>
> Sven, if the GPL prohibits us from distributing the code, we (which is
> to say ftpmaster) won't distribute it. There's no way of phrasi
Hi debian-legal, ...
It seems the firmware kernel issue has reached a deadpoint, as there is some
widely different interpretation of the meaning of the GPL over sourceless
code.
For some background, the kernel/firmware wiki page includes both a proposed
GR, the draft position statement by the ker
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 07:20:35PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Anthony, this is bullshit.
Sven, if the GPL prohibits us from distributing the code, we (which is
to say ftpmaster) won't distribute it. There's no way of phrasing a GR
to change that.
I don't believe the GPL does prohibit us from di
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 09:52:08AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Manoj -
> >
> >>Has anyone done a survey to see how many "do not modify" blobs
> >>we are talking about here?
> >
> > Not counting files already removed in 2.6.17,
> >
> > drivers/net/appletalk/cops_ffdr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Manoj -
>
>>Has anyone done a survey to see how many "do not modify" blobs
>>we are talking about here?
>
> Not counting files already removed in 2.6.17,
>
> drivers/net/appletalk/cops_ffdrv.h use-only (2)
> drivers/net/appletalk/cops_ltdrv.h use-only (2)
> d
23 matches
Mail list logo
