Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Well, i think we are going to have too many options on that ballot, i think we > should do some rationalizing at some point, and keep only a few which will > represent most opinions, and work on polishing their wordings instead of > everyone proposing their pet proposal.
I agree, but it's probably inevitable because Steve Langasek made this a compound proposal, mixing issues, and there are many different combinations which would resolve it. Also, our voting is clone-proof, so hopefully it won't damage the chances of finding the best possible solution. Even so, this option is quite different to the others so far. [...] > Why do you mention the admin section of the non-free archive ? I mean, > sections are mostly obsolet with the new pool structure, and it is not clear > what is meant here. I mean packages with a Section: control field of non-free/admin. Even if it's mostly obsolete, ftpmasters and others are still regulating it, yes? > If this is clarified, i would second your proposal. Hope that's sufficient clarification. Would you second it whether or not I drop the word 'vital' from it? [...] > Notice that the split to non-free will no more happen for etch, i think it is > doubtful that any other issue will come of those GRs. Not 100% sure what you mean, but I think this has changed recently and I hope it's not set in stone. -- 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]
