On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 11:17:23 -0400, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Attached, below, is AJ's release critical policy, in the context of
> sarge.
> I'm thinking we should ratify it, as is. As soon as possible.
I think we should edit the bit about dfsg freeness "may"
become a policy post sarge bit:
>> 1. DFSG-freeness
>> Code in main and contrib must meet the DFSG, both in .debs and
>> in the source (including the .orig.tar.gz).
>> Documentation in main and contrib must be freely
>> distributable, and wherever possible should be under a
>> DFSG-free license. This will likely become a requirement
>> post-sarge.
That last sentence should not be ratified as such by the tech
ctte, given the last two GR's. As it stands, it is not merely
"likely".
"This will be a hard requirement when SC 1.1 becomes effective
post Sarge"
Apart from that, it is an excellent document.
> I'm thinking we should ratify a changed document [which is more
> restrictive on DFSG issues] for releases following sarge.
The Social contract (v1.1) is pretty authoritative, no? What
do you have in mind?
manoj
--
"Of course, someone who knows more about this will correct me if I'm
wrong, and someone who knows less will correct me if I'm right." David
Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
