Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 03:39:46PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote: > > I think that this very thread is an attempt to construct some > > reasonably self-consistent interpretations that we can ask the > > developers to decide between. > > The developers have already decided. Surely you can see there's a major > problem with debian-legal if it doesn't actually know what Debian's > position on a major licensing matter is, even directly after a GR...
We know the conclusion. We don't know key parts of the interpretation and that seems to trouble some contributors. The position statement text approved is not as complete as your proposal. People can try to extrapolate it, and they can ask to verify that extrapolation. The alternative is further arguments here about the view of the project based on little more than guesswork. Voter fatigue seems to be a worry, but it seems the developers should have amended the options to cover minority worries explicitly if they didn't want to vote on this again, to either accommodate or rebut those views definitively. I think at least one clarification GR will probably get enough seconds to hold another vote. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
