On Tue, May 12 2009, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 06:59:41PM +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote: >> On Sun May 10 18:34, Luk Claes wrote: >> > > 3. Option X overrides a foundation document, possibly temporarily (?) >> > >> > Not possible. You can only override a decision and amending a foundation >> > document is the previous option. >> >> What would you call the vote to ship non-free software in etch? Because >> that is what I mean. We are agreeing to do something which the >> foundation document said we would not, but only for a certain period of >> time (etch). >> >> I don't _care_ what you call that, I call it a temporary override of a >> foundation document. > > I think this is the core of the disagreement. I do not call it a > temporary override of a foundation document; I call it a temporary > practical consensus between "the needs of our users" and "the needs of > the free software community".
I thought we had agreed to adhere to a document that lays out how these conflicts between the need of the users and the free software pledge we made is to be resolved: ,---- | 5. Works that do not meet our free software standards | | We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of works | that do not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. We | have created "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our archive for | these works. `---- As I understand it, we, as a project, have acceoted that there is tension between the needs of our users, and the dictates of free software; and the solution we have come up with is called "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our archive. Isn't that perfectly clear? manoj -- Non-sequiturs make me eat lampshades. Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org