| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
FlameFlamePosted Jul 5, 2004 10:03 UTC (Mon) by angdraug (subscriber, #7487)In reply to: Flame by calc Parent article: Debian postpones social contract changes
What Debian releases represents Debian as a whole, and releasing known non-free items in main reflects poorly on all its maintainers. Perhaps those who feel that Debian is not free enough should fork and create a distribution that actually adheres to its SC? ;) That is precisely my point: as in any democracy (or anarchy, if you're not afraid of this word;), you are free to either follow the majority, or to use direct action to oppose it. The latter would mean either creating a fork, or at least enforcing SC in the packages you maintain and submitting patches to other packages. Even though I voted for options 1 and 6, I am not discontent enough (nor have enough resources) to start a fork. If you start it, I would join it, if it wouln't require me to leave Debian. Judging by the vote results, that would be position of quite a lot of DDs.
(Log in to post comments)
Constructive flame. Posted Jul 5, 2004 14:39 UTC (Mon) by mjr (subscriber, #6979) [Link] The latter would mean either creating a fork, or at least enforcing SC in the packages you maintain and submitting patches to other packages. Indeed; as a non-DD I'd urge any malcontents to be constructive and act according to the latter option. I doubt that DFSG compliance patches would be frowned upon. I'm only maintaining a single package of my own software, but I know I'd fix it regardless of this vote if it had something non-DSFG-free in it.
|
|
||||||||||||