Anthony Towns wrote:
>
>--ZRyEpB+iJ+qUx0kp
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 11:03:33PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
>> DEBIAN GENERAL RESOLUTION
>> Proposed by: John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>I wish to propose an ammendment to the proposed resolution as follows.
>
>The text of the resolution should be replaced with a call for the
>developers to resolve that:
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 1) the Debian project continues to acknowledge the utility of providing
> non-free software for it users.
>
> 2) the Debian project also acknowledges that some developers may be
> unwilling or unable to explicitly work on non-free software, and
> holds that this is not and should not be detrimental to their work
> on the Debian GNU/Linux distribution, or their contribution to the
> Debian project.
>
> 3) the Debian project considers equating the importance of the "contrib"
> and "non-free" areas described in the Social Contract with the
> official Debian GNU/Linux distribution inappropriate.
>
> 4) noting that the Debian project already distributes various other
> collections of unofficial packages, the project endorses a move to
> specifically collect the various other add-on components such as
> "experimental", "orphaned", "non-free" and "contrib" and to clearly
> separate these from the "main" collection.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>The intention of this ammendment is to provide a means for developers to
>offer their support of the existing social contract while acknowledging
>that the current situation does indeed give somewhat too much credibility.
>
>This is obviously something of a compromise position, and as such it is
>intended to be a resolution that can be agreed to even without agreeing
>that it's the better possibility of those offered.
>
>While the implied technical changes in item (4) should not have any
>significant negative consequences, they may be implemented in a way that
>will provide some significant benefits: tying orphaned and experimental to
>a particular release may make some software more accessible to users who
>do not wish to run unstable; and setting up infrastructure for various
>add-on components may make it more convenient to host staging areas
>that don't quite conform to policy: in order to make Gnome packages
>consistent, or to make IPv6 packages usable, or even to distribute
>Debianised KDE source.
>
>I imagine this ammendment would be best as a separate option on the
>ballot to the original proposal, and as such it will require five seconds.
>
>Respectfully submitted,
I second/sponsor this.
--
Oliver Elphick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
PGP: 1024R/32B8FAA1: 97 EA 1D 47 72 3F 28 47 6B 7E 39 CC 56 E4 C1 47
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
========================================
"I love them that love me; and those that seek me early
shall find me." Proverbs 8:17
PGP signature
