On Wed, 05 Oct 2022 at 16:34:27 +0200, Philip Hands wrote:
> I didn't want to inflict work on the debian-cd
> team, and I assume that nobody will object if volunteers turn up to help
> build/test the free images. If they're built and tested, I'm pretty sure
> they'll be published.
As one of the
Ian Jackson writes:
> Russ Allbery writes ("Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results"):
>> I don't think you can draw any meaningful conclusions from this ranking
>> because of the concern that the latter option may have been ruled invalid
>> by the P
Steve McIntyre writes ("Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results"):
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 02:34:33PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> >Certainly given the narrow margin, we should do what we can to make it
> >easy for those who want to provide an unofficial full
On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 02:34:33PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx writes ("General Resolution: non-free
>firmware: results"):
>> The results of the General Resolution about non-free firmware:
>> Option 5 "Change SC for no
Russ Allbery writes ("Re: General Resolution: non-free firmware: results"):
> I don't think you can draw any meaningful conclusions from this ranking
> because of the concern that the latter option may have been ruled invalid
> by the Project Secretary. I prefer one inst
Russ Allbery writes:
> Ian Jackson writes:
>> Certainly given the narrow margin, we should do what we can to make it
>> easy for those who want to provide an unofficial fully-free installer
>> to do so. I think we might even want to link to it from the official
>> page, inverting the way we
Ian Jackson writes:
> Observe also that "Recommend installer containing non-free firmware"
> beat "Only one installer" by 12 votes.
I don't think you can draw any meaningful conclusions from this ranking
because of the concern that the latter option may have been ruled invalid
by the Project
Ian Jackson left as an exercise for the reader:
> 6 votes is a very tight margin between "one installer" and "two
> installers".
for anyone not doing the work of producing and staging two
installers, there was little real difference between these two
options (less potential confusion was the
On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 02:34:33PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Certainly given the narrow margin, we should do what we can to make it
> easy for those who want to provide an unofficial fully-free installer
> to do so. I think we might even want to link to it from the official
> page, inverting
Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx writes ("General Resolution: non-free
firmware: results"):
> The results of the General Resolution about non-free firmware:
> Option 5 "Change SC for non-free firmware in installer, one installer"
>
> The details of the r
Hi,
The results of the General Resolution about non-free firmware:
Option 5 "Change SC for non-free firmware in installer, one installer"
The details of the results are available at:
https://www.debian.org/vote/2022/vote_003
Kurt Roeckx
Debian Project Secretary
signature.asc
Description:
11 matches
Mail list logo
