On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 10:50:41AM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 11:35:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > > Make sure you have read the proposal in detail. > > A little plea for the next GR discussion season: when people discuss a > GR, please keep in mind that the discussion will become material that > people would like to read before deciding what to vote. > > http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_004 says: > > Please note that this does not include preludes, prologues, any > preambles to the resolution, post-ambles to the resolution, abstracts, > fore-words, after-words, rationales, supporting documents, opinion > polls, arguments for and against, and any of the other important > material you will find on the mailing list archives. Please read the > debian-vote mailing list archives for details. > > I do not have time nor motivation to go through the huge debian-vote > mailing list archives of the last month. > > It would be useful if the main proponents of either result would work > together (offline? on the wiki?) on a single short text that would > summarise both positions in a way that they both think is fair. > > A few suggestions for trying to have a better list archive next time can > found in http://people.debian.org/~enrico/dcg/ , and more specifically > in http://people.debian.org/~enrico/dcg/ch02.html
There will be a kernel team meeting this evening, where we will discuss these licencing issues, and try to come with a common text which the kernel team, the d-i team and the RM team can second. So, stay tuned for a new proposal tomorrow, which will obsolet all or most others. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]