I seconded the original proposal, and I now second the amended proposal. I'd like to point out to the many people who are reacting with alarm at this proposal that, even if/when it acquires the needed 5 seconds, the next step would be a minimum 2 week debate, followed by a general vote. I (obviously) think the proposal has merit. But I'm not totally convinced that it's time is at hand. Therefore I am seconding the proposal to ensure debate. So far, most of the pro arguments I've seen are calm discussion, but many of the opposing arguments are highly inflammatory. The opposing arguments that have not resorted to logical fallacy and sarcasm carry much more weight in my analysis. In short: If your mind is already made up, flames are fun. But I suspect that developers who are undecided will not cast their vote based on who flamed the best. Debate == Good. Flame == Bad. Regards, Steve John Goerzen wrote: > Due to some comments I've received (thanks Adam and Branden), and a > few weaknesses I've seen, I've revised my proposal. Here it is with > revisions. My understanding is that if you seconded the original, > you'll need to second this one as well. Also, more seconds are needed > and encouraged, but please be aware that you should sign your second > with your GPG key. > > I'll include the updated Resolution only and not reproduce the Rationale > here. For that you may refer to my original post. > > ------ > Debian General Resolution > > Resolved: > > A. That the Debian Social Contract with the Free Software Community be > amended as follows: > > 1. That text of Section 5 be modified to read: "We acknowledge that > some of our users require the use of programs that don't conform to > the Debian Free Software Guidelines. While we will not distribute > such software itself, we have created areas in our archive for > packages that help install or otherwise requre this software. The > software in these areas is not part of the Debian system, although > it has been configured for use with Debian." The title of > Section 5 shall be modified to read: "We will support users of our > system who develop or run non-free software." > > 2. That Section 1 be amended such that the final sentence reads: "We > will neither distribute nor make the system depend upon an item of > non-free software." > > B. That the non-free areas be removed from current Debian archives, > and that all packages so placed there in accordance with the > definition in Policy section 2.1.4 be removed from the Distribution > and archives. The introduction into the Debian Distribution or the > Debian archives of any package meeting the non-free definition in > Policy section 2.1.4, or failing the Debian Free Software Guidelines, > shall be forbidden. > > C. That the maintainer of the Debian Policy Manual, or an appointee of > the Debian Project Leader, be directed to update that manual > respective of the changes to the Project and general Project policy > detailed in sections A and B above. > > D. That the maintainers of the Debian archives and website, or an > appointee of the Debian Project Leader, be directed to implement the > changes to the Debian archives and website to reflect the changes to > Debian enacted by the foregoing clauses in this Resolution. > > E. That the disposition of the non-free areas in historical, released, > and frozen Debian Distrubutions and archives shall be determined per > the Debian Constitution. > > -------- end of Resolution -------- > > Branden Robinson's assistance with this revision is greatfully > acknowledged. > > -- > John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> www.complete.org > Sr. Software Developer, Progeny Linux Systems, Inc. www.progenylinux.com > #include <std_disclaimer.h> <jgoerzen@progenylinux.com> > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org >
Attachment:
pgp6j3C63f36H.pgp
Description: PGP signature