#include
* Frans Pop [Wed, Aug 23 2006, 02:28:30AM]:
> Seconded.
Also seconded.
> > The application of DFSG#2 to firmware and other data
> >
> >
> > The Debian Project recognizes that access to source code for a work of
> >
I propose the following amendment to Steve's proposal.
> THE DEBIAN PROJECT therefore,
>
> 1. reaffirms its dedication to providing a 100% free system to our
> users according to our Social Contract and the DFSG; and
>
> 2. encourages authors of all works to make those works avai
#include
* Joey Hess [Wed, Aug 23 2006, 02:15:59PM]:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
> > If it makes sense, what are the major difficulties/inconveniences/whatever
> > that were found in having this happen for etch, that will need to be
> > addressed to achieve an etch+1 release that's both useful and conv
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Rationale: most of us want to release etch ASAP, and most of us want to
>remove the firmwares from the kernel ASAP. This is a way that shouldn't
This is false: most of us do not mind at all distributing sourceless
(or even not modifiable) firmwares in the kernel packages.
Le samedi 26 août 2006 à 11:50 +0200, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >Rationale: most of us want to release etch ASAP, and most of us want to
> >remove the firmwares from the kernel ASAP. This is a way that shouldn't
> This is false: most of us do not mind at all distributin
On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 11:50:11AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >Rationale: most of us want to release etch ASAP, and most of us want to
> >remove the firmwares from the kernel ASAP. This is a way that shouldn't
> This is false: most of us do not mind at all distributing sourceless
> (or even not m
[Eduard Bloch]
> > . Ship a separate non-free CD.
>
> > * Does bad things to our CD/DVD disk space requirements.
>
> How? Basedebs take about 40MB. I think there is a plenty of space on the
> non-free CD for those, together with udebs and boot images.
Because it implies that we p
Hrm, maybe this thread should move elsewhere.
On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 05:35:00AM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Eduard Bloch]
> > > . Ship a separate non-free CD.
> >
> > >* Does bad things to our CD/DVD disk space requirements.
> >
> > How? Basedebs take about 40MB. I think t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >Rationale: most of us want to release etch ASAP, and most of us want to
>> >remove the firmwares from the kernel ASAP. This is a way that shouldn't
>> This is false: most of us do not mind at all distributing sourceless
>> (or even not modifiable) firmwares in the kern
On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 11:24:47AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
Thanks for saying those things, which i was thinking myself, but could not
have expressed without being seen as a whiner.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscrib
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 03:18:04PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Ever since the sarge release, an ongoing question has been: what do
> the DFSG require for works that are not "programs" as previously
> understood in Debian? Several rounds of general resolutions have now
> given us answers for som
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:01:38AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 01:12:25AM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > I would like to see some language to the effect that we make the
> > exception for firmware only in the cases of data that use the moral
> > equivalent of the kernel l
#include
* Peter Samuelson [Sat, Aug 26 2006, 05:35:00AM]:
>
> [Eduard Bloch]
> > > . Ship a separate non-free CD.
> >
> > >* Does bad things to our CD/DVD disk space requirements.
> >
> > How? Basedebs take about 40MB. I think there is a plenty of space on the
> > non-free CD for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>This discussion has indeed been going on for a while. The most important
>arguments seem to be that one side is saying "It must be Free!" while
>the other claims "There is nothing useful in making it Free".
Wrong. The real other argument is "there is nothing useful in mak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>No. We just keep providing the official free images. And someone else will
>provide the non-free variants.
Yes: Ubuntu.
> This scenario would reflect exactly the
>situation that already exists WRT Debian as in (free) "Debian" and Debian as in
>"Debian + non-free + even-m
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 05:38:07PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 01:28:35AM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> > [Steve Langasek]
> > > That's an interesting point. Can you elaborate on how you see this
> > > being a loophole, in a sense that having the firmware on a ROM
> > >
#include
* Sven Luther [Sat, Aug 26 2006, 06:21:54PM]:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 11:24:47AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > #include
>
> Thanks for saying those things, which i was thinking myself, but could not
> have expressed without being seen as a whiner.
You know, it's always the same. Whe
On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 09:31:58PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Sven Luther [Sat, Aug 26 2006, 06:21:54PM]:
> > On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 11:24:47AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > > #include
> >
> > Thanks for saying those things, which i was thinking myself, but could not
> > have ex
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Enrico Zini wrote:
> In this view, I see two problems with your GR:
>
> 1. It needs a separate vote to affirm "we happen to need it".
Yes, that's by design. IMO such a exception to the SC/DFSG should be
addressed explicitely by a GR doing exactly that and specifically
settin
19 matches
Mail list logo
