Kurt Roeckx <k...@roeckx.be> writes: > If you have an option saying "Allow Lenny to release with firmware > blobs. This does not override the DFSG", I can only see that make sense > if it really means: "firmware blobs are not a DFSG violation", and the > "Lenny" part doesn't make sense.
> The same goes for "Allow Lenny to release with known DFSG violations. > This does not override the SC." That would be the same as "Allow > releases with known DFSG violations". I agree. However, I'm very reluctant to say that the Secretary should prevent the project from voting on proposals that don't make sense, provided that they're constitutionally clear. I would vote against both of those proposals as phrased because I think they're self-contradictory and they're not interpretations that I think we can make, despite the fact that I was on the side favoring releasing lenny in the previous GR. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
