On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 15:13:53 -0700, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 12:06:05PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 01:49:12 +1000, Anthony Towns >> <[email protected]> said: >> > I'm sorry, you're mistaken. It was against Andrew's >> > interpretation of the social contract. It wasn't against mine, >> > nor to the best of >> >> It certainly was against what I took the social contract to be. I >> never imagined that Debian was about only part of main being free, >> indeed, as Bruce has stated, I, too, was under the impression that >> the SC and the DFSG applied to everything on the Debian CD. > I do not see how it can be maintained that these were "editorial > changes" when there is clearly a significant number of developers > who believe that the meaning of the Social Contract was changed (to > the point of forcing action that was not forced before). The reason I can maintain that the title was correct when the issue was voted was that, unlike you, I am not telepathic; that no one raised this issue while the vote was on, even the opponents, and I just see a bunch of people whining after the fact when they realize their apathy lead them to an end result they are unhappy with. manoj -- "Good health" is merely the slowest rate at which one can die. 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
