Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Russ Allbery]

Ilu  writes:
> Am 08.12.23 um 21:13 schrieb Russ Allbery:

>> How about:

>>  CRA and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to FOSS

> This would be real-english-english? ;-) If it has the same meaning, fine
> by me. I've pinged Santiago.

Yeah, casually you would normally stick "that would be" or "that are" in
between "regulations" and "detrimental", but you can omit it without loss
of meaning.  This wording reads as more formal and a little stuffy, but I
think people will understand it.

You more often see this construction in the phrase "actions detrimental to
" in, say, codes of conduct or laws or whatnot.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)  

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Luca Boccassi]

On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 23:04, Bart Martens  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 10:06:45PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 08/12/23 at 21:58 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > [ ] Choice 1: CRA and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to 
> > > FOSS
> > > [ ] Choice 2: The EU should clarify that non-commercial FOSS is exempted
> >
> > "non-commercial FOSS" sounds like CC BY-NC-SA (which is not FOSS). What
> > this option is trying to say is that FOSS development outside commercial
> > context should be exempted (or non-commercial FOSS organizations).
> >
> > However I cannot find a wording that fits on a single line...
>
> Maybe this?
> [ ] Choice 2: The EU should exempt non-commercial use of FOSS"

It's not just use, development too. Maybe:

"CRA and PLD proposals should only apply to commercial ventures"

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Bart Martens]

On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 10:06:45PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 08/12/23 at 21:58 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > [ ] Choice 1: CRA and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to FOSS
> > [ ] Choice 2: The EU should clarify that non-commercial FOSS is exempted
> 
> "non-commercial FOSS" sounds like CC BY-NC-SA (which is not FOSS). What
> this option is trying to say is that FOSS development outside commercial
> context should be exempted (or non-commercial FOSS organizations).
> 
> However I cannot find a wording that fits on a single line...

Maybe this?
[ ] Choice 2: The EU should exempt non-commercial use of FOSS"

> 
> Lucas
> 

-- 

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Santiago Ruano Rincón]

El 08/12/23 a las 21:37, Ilu escribió:
> Am 08.12.23 um 21:13 schrieb Russ Allbery:
> > Ilu  writes:
> > 
> > > CRA + PLD proposals include regulations, that will be detrimental
> > > to FOSS
> > 
> > How about:
> > 
> >  CRA and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to FOSS
> > 
> 
> This would be real-english-english? ;-) If it has the same meaning, fine
> by me. I've pinged Santiago.

I fully trust Russ's English skills :-)

LGTM.

Thank you!


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Lucas Nussbaum]

Hi,

On 08/12/23 at 21:58 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> [ ] Choice 1: CRA and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to FOSS
> [ ] Choice 2: The EU should clarify that non-commercial FOSS is exempted

"non-commercial FOSS" sounds like CC BY-NC-SA (which is not FOSS). What
this option is trying to say is that FOSS development outside commercial
context should be exempted (or non-commercial FOSS organizations).

However I cannot find a wording that fits on a single line...

Lucas

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 10:39:38PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I've updated the page at https://www.debian.org/vote/2023/vote_002 which
> the current status.

Here is the draft ballot:

 Voting period starts  2023-12-09 00:00:00 UTC
 Votes must be received by 2023-12-22 23:59:59 UTC

This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.
You may see the constitution at https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution.
For voting questions or problems contact secret...@debian.org.

The details of the general resolution can be found at:
https://www.debian.org/vote/2023/vote_002

Also, note that you can get a fresh ballot any time before the end of the
vote by sending a signed mail to
   bal...@vote.debian.org
with the subject "gr_non_free_firmware".

To vote you need to be a Debian Developer.


HOW TO VOTE

First, read the full text of the options.

You might also want to read discussions at
https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/

To cast a vote, it is necessary to send this ballot filled out to a
dedicated e-mail address, in a signed message, as described below. The
dedicated email address this ballot should be sent to is:

  gr_non_free_firmw...@vote.debian.org

The form you need to fill out is contained bellow in this message, marked
with two lines containing the characters '-=-=-=-=-=-'. Do not erase
anything between those lines, and do not change the choice names.

There are 4 choices in the form, which you may rank with numbers between 1
and 4. In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2
in the brackets next to your next choice. Continue until you reach your
last choice. Do not enter a number smaller than 1 or larger than 4.

You may skip numbers, leave some choices unranked, and rank options
equally. Unranked choices are considered equally the least desired
choices, and ranked below all ranked choices.

To vote "no, no matter what", rank "None of the above" as more desirable
than the unacceptable choices, or you may rank the "None of the above"
choice and leave choices you consider unacceptable blank. (Note: if the
"None of the above" choice is unranked, then it is equal to all other
unranked choices, if any -- no special consideration is given to the
"None of the above" choice by the voting software).

Finally, mail the filled out ballot to:
gr_cra_...@vote.debian.org.

Don't worry about spacing of the columns or any quote characters (">")
that your reply inserts.

NOTE: The vote must be GPG signed (or PGP signed) with your key that is
in the Debian keyring. You may, if you wish, choose to send a signed,
encrypted ballot: use the vote key appended below for encryption.

The voting software (Devotee) accepts mail that either contains only an
unmangled OpenPGP message (RFC 2440 compliant), or a PGP/MIME mail
(RFC 3156 compliant). To avoid problems I suggest you use PGP/MIME.

VOTING SECRECY

This is a secret vote. After the voting period there will be a record
of all the votes without the name of the voter. It will instead contain
a cryptographic hash. You will receive a secret after you have voted
that can be used to calculate that hash. This allows you to verify
that your vote is in the list. This secret is sent in an encrypted
mail.

VOTING FORM

- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
52bbd34b-1e8e-45ad-bd32-e517dbf2958c
[ ] Choice 1: CRA and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to FOSS
[ ] Choice 2: The EU should clarify that non-commercial FOSS is exempted
[ ] Choice 3: The EU should not overrule DFSG 6 and FOSS licenses
[ ] Choice 4: None Of The Above
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

--

The responses to a valid vote shall be signed by the vote key created for
this vote. The public key for the vote, signed by the Project secretary,
is appended below.

BALLOT OPTIONS

Choice 1: CRA and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to FOSS
===

Debian Public Statement about the EU Cyber Resilience Act and the
Product Liability Directive

The European Union is currently preparing a regulation "on horizontal
cybersecurity requirements for products with digital elements" known as
the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA). It is currently in the final "trilogue"
phase of the legislative process. The act includes a set of essential
cybersecurity and vulnerability handling requirements for manufacturers.
It will require products to be accompanied by information and
instructions to the user. Manufacturers will need to perform risk
assessments and produce technical documentation and, for critical
components, have third-party audits conducted. Discovered security
issues will have to be reported to European authorities within 24 hours
(1). The CRA will be followed up by the Product Liability 

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Ilu]

Am 08.12.23 um 21:13 schrieb Russ Allbery:

Ilu  writes:


CRA + PLD proposals include regulations, that will be detrimental
to FOSS


How about:

 CRA and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to FOSS



This would be real-english-english? ;-) If it has the same meaning, fine
by me. I've pinged Santiago.

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Russ Allbery]

Ilu  writes:

> CRA + PLD proposals include regulations, that will be detrimental
> to FOSS

How about:

CRA and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to FOSS

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)  

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Ilu]

Am 08.12.23 um 20:55 schrieb Judit Foglszinger:

The CRA and PLD proposals include regulations, that will be detrimental
to free and open source software


We've never had such a long option, and I'm worried this will break for
some people trying to vote when it gets wrapped to the next line. But it
might also just be fine. There is at least some code that only checks
the first few words or something like that.


regulations in CRA and PLD proposals will be detrimental to FLOSS ?



No. It is important that vote A did not say that ALL of CRA and PLD are
detrimental. Just certain parts of it. It says explicitely: "While a lot
of these regulations seem reasonable,..."

CRA + PLD proposals include regulations, that will be detrimental
to FOSS

Without knowing the character limit I cannot produce a solution, but if
this is still too long you could remove the word "proposals".

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Judit Foglszinger]

> > The CRA and PLD proposals include regulations, that will be detrimental
> > to free and open source software
> 
> We've never had such a long option, and I'm worried this will break for
> some people trying to vote when it gets wrapped to the next line. But it
> might also just be fine. There is at least some code that only checks
> the first few words or something like that.

regulations in CRA and PLD proposals will be detrimental to FLOSS ?


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 08:43:33PM +0100, Ilu wrote:
> The CRA and PLD proposals include regulations, that will be detrimental
> to free and open source software

We've never had such a long option, and I'm worried this will break for
some people trying to vote when it gets wrapped to the next line. But it
might also just be fine. There is at least some code that only checks
the first few words or something like that.


Kurt

> Am 08.12.23 um 20:40 schrieb Kurt Roeckx:
> > The CRA and PLD will be detrimental to open source software
> 

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Ilu]

The CRA and PLD proposals include regulations, that will be detrimental
to free and open source software

Am 08.12.23 um 20:40 schrieb Kurt Roeckx:

The CRA and PLD will be detrimental to open source software

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Kurt Roeckx]

Since the vote will start in a few hours, I need options for the other 2
options. My best attempts so far:
A: The CRA and PLD will be detrimental to open source software
B: The EU should clarify that non-commercial open source is exempted
C: The EU should not overrule DFSG 6 and FOSS licenses


Kurt

On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 04:43:09PM +0100, Bart Martens wrote:
> May I suggest for proposal C:
> "The EU should not overrule DFSG 6 and FOSS licenses"
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 07:19:44AM +0300, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > Can people make suggestions for the ballot options text?
> > 
> > Kurt
> > 
> > On November 30, 2023 12:39:38 AM GMT+03:00, Kurt Roeckx  
> > wrote:
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >I've updated the page at https://www.debian.org/vote/2023/vote_002 which
> > >the current status.
> > >
> > >We're at the maximum discussion period of 3 weeks, so the vote will
> > >probably start the 10th of December.
> > >
> > >
> > >Kurt
> > >
> 
> -- 
> 

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Bart Martens]

May I suggest for proposal C:
"The EU should not overrule DFSG 6 and FOSS licenses"


On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 07:19:44AM +0300, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Can people make suggestions for the ballot options text?
> 
> Kurt
> 
> On November 30, 2023 12:39:38 AM GMT+03:00, Kurt Roeckx  
> wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I've updated the page at https://www.debian.org/vote/2023/vote_002 which
> >the current status.
> >
> >We're at the maximum discussion period of 3 weeks, so the vote will
> >probably start the 10th of December.
> >
> >
> >Kurt
> >

-- 

Re: CRA and PLD vote status

[Kurt Roeckx]

Can people make suggestions for the ballot options text?

Kurt

On November 30, 2023 12:39:38 AM GMT+03:00, Kurt Roeckx  wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I've updated the page at https://www.debian.org/vote/2023/vote_002 which
>the current status.
>
>We're at the maximum discussion period of 3 weeks, so the vote will
>probably start the 10th of December.
>
>
>Kurt
>