On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 15:22 +0000, Anthony Towns wrote: > Thomas: your continued inaction and unwillingness to code an acceptable > solution to this issue, in spite of being aware of the problem since > at least 2004 -- over four years ago! -- means we will continue to do > releases with non-free software.
I am *happy* to code an acceptable solution, but I regard "not support the hardware for installation" as acceptable. I ask simply that the project's standards be *applied*, or that at the very least, we have a resolution as we did before. And yes, I would likely vote against it, as I did before. But in a democratic system, people generally are well advised to accept the result of past votes gracefully and work towards the next one. That's what I did; my vote did not carry the day last time, and I have not objected about that decision since. But I *do* object to the apparent new rule that the ftpmasters and release engineers are now empowered to ignore DFSG violations without any review by anyone else. And now we have people saying, "hey, let's exempt firmware from the DFSG!" again, even though we have a GR on topic which decided that, no, firmware counts. > "Hey, you've had four years; we're just going to keep releasing until > you fix the bug." > > Hint: you're not being held hostage by anyone, seriously. You know how > you can tell? Two words: Stockholm syndrome. So I can upload an NMU right now that fixes the problem? That will be ok? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]