On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 03:48:01PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: >On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 08:01:02PM +0000, Stephen Gran wrote: >> >> I have to admit that I'm a bit curious how you justify needing a 3:1 >> supermajority to update a Packages file, but not to have the software >> in question served in the first place. > >The basic difference is that in one case it is the result of an unintended >mistake [1], and in the other it is the result of known, willfull >infringement of the Social Contract. > >It is in fact so clear, that we have a state in the BTS for bugs that are >known to violate the DFSG and nevertheless intentionally ignored by the >Release Team ("lenny-ignore" tag).
-1 Troll -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [EMAIL PROTECTED] "We're the technical experts. We were hired so that management could ignore our recommendations and tell us how to do our jobs." -- Mike Andrews -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]