Re: An ammendment (Re: Formal CFV: General Resolution to Abolish Non-Free)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> I wish to propose an ammendment to the proposed resolution as follows.
>
> The text of the resolution should be replaced with a call for the
> developers to resolve that:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 1) the Debian project continues to acknowledge the utility of providing
> non-free software for it users.
>
> 2) the Debian project also acknowledges that some developers may be
> unwilling or unable to explicitly work on non-free software, and
> holds that this is not and should not be detrimental to their work
> on the Debian GNU/Linux distribution, or their contribution to the
> Debian project.
>
> 3) the Debian project considers equating the importance of the "contrib"
> and "non-free" areas described in the Social Contract with the
> official Debian GNU/Linux distribution inappropriate.
>
> 4) noting that the Debian project already distributes various other
> collections of unofficial packages, the project endorses a move to
> specifically collect the various other add-on components such as
> "experimental", "orphaned", "non-free" and "contrib" and to clearly
> separate these from the "main" collection.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I second this amendment.
For the entertainment of those who think "This is not really an
amendment", here the first definition of "to amend" from Webster 1913:
To change or modify in any way for the better; as,
(a) by simply removing what is erroneous, corrupt,
superfluous, faulty, and the like;
(b) by supplying deficiencies;
(c) by substituting something else in the place of what is
removed; to rectify.
leo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE5QteyXSurO668xegRAszRAJ9Umu6wewAclCKUxz0ANKG+ZrqI4QCeOBqd
D7AxvgDO0X2Vg3ks2bCETfw=
=LX1z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: