Gunnar Wolf writes:
> If it does not require the explicit approval of the sponsors, yes, I
> agree this text clarifies and makes better the text I proposed.
I'm not Kurt, but I think A.1.3 applies here:
The proposer of a ballot option may amend that option provided that
none of the spon
Kurt Roeckx dijo [Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 10:29:28PM +0200]:
> > >> >What's the rationale for this one?
> > >> >
> > >> >I think it would make more sense to only configure the system to enable
> > >> >the non-free-firmware component if the installer determines that
> > >> >packages from that component
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 05:05:35PM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> Didn't we have buster/updates for a while? Is breakage related to that
> the reason why we're not doing this here?
We didn't have "buster" and "buster/updates" in the same place. And
less "buster/updates" being a subset of "buster
On 2022-08-30 21:57:56, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 04:27:17PM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>>On 2022-08-30 21:11:07, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>>
>>> But I want to be *very* clear here that we *don't* want to enable the
>>> whole of the non-free component for all users by default
Hi
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 03:11:25PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
> DSC 1 says we will never "require the use of a non-free component". To me,
> this is the major relevant issue.
Nothing in Debian requires any non-free component. Require would be:
can't be used without, which clearly is not tru
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 04:27:17PM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>On 2022-08-30 21:11:07, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>
>> But I want to be *very* clear here that we *don't* want to enable the
>> whole of the non-free component for all users by default. That would
>> be a grave disservice, and I think A
Hey Russ!
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 07:55:11PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Kurt Roeckx writes:
>
>> It's my current interpretation that all voting options, even if they
>> might conflict with the DSC, will be on the ballot, and might not
>> require a 3:1 majority. That is, I don't think the Secreta
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 08:28:15PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>Steve McIntyre dixit:
>
>>You've utterly missed Phil's point about people not seeing or hearing
>>boot options.
>
>I didn’t. I pointed out that people can select different bootloader
>options if their bootloader is already set up for
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:00:50PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hi Kurt! Let's send this signed now,
>
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 04:26:40PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:26:51AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> Hey Wouter!
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 12:19:55PM
Steve McIntyre dixit:
>Please go and *read* and *respond* in debian-vote. The discussion is
>there, not here.
I wrote where the Reply-To pointed to. Perhaps if that had been
correct…
>You've utterly missed Phil's point about people not seeing or hearing
>boot options.
I didn’t. I pointed out th
On 2022-08-30 21:11:07, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hey Antoine!
>
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 11:33:15AM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
[...]
>>> Since I started talking about this, Ansgar has already added dak
>>> support for a new, separate non-free-firmware component - see
>>> [4]. This makes part o
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:22:39AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>Steve McIntyre writes:
...
>>>Thereby re-inforcing the interpretation that any installer or image with
>>>non-free software on it is not part of the Debian system, but that we
>>>support their use and welcome others to distribute
On 8/30/22 12:00, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 03:27:46AM -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
Regardless of that, and probably more importantly, I object to the idea that
a GR option winning could result in the whole GR being voided. Our voting
system is explicitly designed to take into a
Hey Antoine!
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 11:33:15AM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
...
>I particularly want to salute your work on making our users actually
>capable of using more modern hardware. I think the proposal you bring up
>(and the others that were added to the ballot) will really help move
Hi Kurt! Let's send this signed now,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 04:26:40PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:26:51AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Hey Wouter!
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 12:19:55PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> >On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 08:58:21PM +0100, St
Hi Bart!
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:12:23PM +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
>On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 09:49:14PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Hi Simon!
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 09:06:38AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>
>> >
>> >Thereby re-inforcing the interpretation that any installer or imag
On 2022-08-30 21:28:08, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:22:51PM +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 11:33:15AM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>> > Hi Steve (and everyone else),
>> > > I believe that there is reasonably wide support for changing what we
>> > > do wi
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:22:51PM +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 11:33:15AM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> > Hi Steve (and everyone else),
> > > I believe that there is reasonably wide support for changing what we
> > > do with non-free firmware. I see several possible paths
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 11:33:15AM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> Hi Steve (and everyone else),
> > I believe that there is reasonably wide support for changing what we
> > do with non-free firmware. I see several possible paths forward, but
> > as I've stated previously I don't want to be making
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 09:49:14PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hi Simon!
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 09:06:38AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> >
> >Thereby re-inforcing the interpretation that any installer or image with
> >non-free software on it is not part of the Debian system, but that we
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 11:02:09PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> If you believe that any of the options conflict with the DSC, I would
> like to see a discussion about that too.
>
> It's my current interpretation that all voting options, even if they
> might conflict with the DSC, will be on the bal
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 03:27:46AM -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
> On 8/29/22 16:02, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > It's my current interpretation that all voting options, even if they
> > might conflict with the DSC, will be on the ballot, and might not
> > require a 3:1 majority. That is, I don't think th
Kurt Roeckx writes:
> But it's currently not clear if this is a technical or non-technical
> decision, and so might require a 2:1 majority.
I forgot to comment on this point in my other message, but for what it's
worth, I have a hard time seeing any of the current ballot options as
technical. T
Hi Steve (and everyone else),
> I'm proposing to change how we handle non-free firmware in
> Debian. I've written about this a few times already this year [1, 2]
> and I ran a session on the subject at DebConf [3].
>
> TL;DR: The way we deal with (non-free) firmware in Debian isn't
> great. F
On 8/29/22 16:02, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
It's my current interpretation that all voting options, even if they
might conflict with the DSC, will be on the ballot, and might not
require a 3:1 majority. That is, I don't think the Secretary can decide
not to include an option that might conflict, or put
Steve McIntyre writes:
> Hi Simon!
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 09:06:38AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>>
>>==
>>
>>We continue to stand by the spirit of the Debian Social Contract §1
>>which says:
>>
>> Debian will remain 100% free
>>
>> We provide the guidelines that we use
26 matches
Mail list logo
