FSDN: SweetCode ANSOL PostgreSQL Techdocs Advogato
[GNU-Friends] Sections: Front Page News Interviews GNU-Friends Diaries
Menu: About Submit Story FAQ Donate Search
This page brought to you by: Jonas berg, just another GNU friend.
Proposal for Debian to drop non-free section fails to reach 3:1 majority
By brian, Section News
Posted on Wed Mar 24th, 2004 at 12:09:03 GMT
The resolution proposed by Andrew Suffield for Debian to drop support for its non-free section failed to pass in a vote of Debian developers. The proposal would have required a 3:1 majority to be accepted, since support for a non-free section is part of the original Debian "Social Contract". The full details of the voting can be found at Debian.org.

 

< FFII EU conference and free software meeting (Brussels, 14-15 April) (1 comments) | W3C Patent Advisory Group Final Report Published (1 comments) >
Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

View: Display: Sort:
Proposal for Debian to drop non-free section fails to reach 3:1 majority | 2 comments (2 topical, editorial) | Post A Comment
[new] Sad, but not disappointing (#1)
by marcus (#311) on Thu Mar 25th, 2004 at 19:06:51 GMT
(User Info) http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/

This development had to be expected, although it is unfortunate for Debian, which is a diversive group of people with various interests and personalities.

The reason it is not unexpected becomes apparent if you look at the history of this vote. With Debian's constitution, the formal process of General Resolutions (GRs) was introduced, which is a way to make group decisions by the support of a majority.

The GRs are rarely used, which shows how democratic Debian actually is (not really much at all). The only "interesting" GR that was ever introduced by the Debian members was this non-free proposal. Of course, as it was a proposal that could really have changed something (rather than just being a meaningless formality to legitimize an existing institution), it had to be prevented.

The way this was done is to attack the legitimacy of the issue. It was suggested that it should not be possible to change the Debian social contract with a GR, despite the fact that the constitution had been accepted by a huge majority of the Debian members long before. It was suggested that it was an omission that the Debian constitution did not exempt the Debian social contract from modifications by a simple majority.

So, the constitution had to be "fixed", which means, it had to be ensured that meaningful changes are not possible, by raising the barrier to a 3:1 majority, putting the social contract at the same level as the constitution itself.

This issue was proposed in a GR and voted upon long after the non-free GR was introduced. The non-free GR was simply stalled. In fact, this was not enough: The non-free GR could still have passed. So it was stalled another few years.

I have then at some point stopped following this issue. Now, after four years after having been introduced, and after changing the constitution to raise the barrier, this issue was voted upon.

In fact, given the non-democratic nature of Debian, and the highly authoritative and repressive long term Debian maintainers who sit on delegate positions, it is surprising that this issue was vote upon at all. One could call that a success, by all means. So far, and despite the difficulties, it has been one of the few exceptional democratic moments of Debian.

Is it surprising then that the suggestion to remove non-free from Debian didn't even get a simple majority? Maybe. We don't know why that is the case. However, it means that beside Debian there is still some room for a GNU distribution that breathes the free software spirit and embodies it without compromise.

Number of packages in Debian non-free: 276.
Number of packages in Debian contrib: 332 (contrib requires non-free to compile or run)


[ Reply to This ]


 
[new] r"r- (#2)
by a member of the hurd (#-1) on Wed Dec 15th, 2004 at 10:41:25 GMT

鲜 /--*i googler"r- 鲜 /--*i /-绿A`d摆

[ Reply to This ]


 
Proposal for Debian to drop non-free section fails to reach 3:1 majority | 2 comments (2 topical, editorial) | Post A Comment
View: Display: Sort:

Verbatim copying and distribution of this article is permitted in any medium, provided this notice is preserved. Images of gnu:s in the logo are © Free Software Foundation, Inc and distributed under the GNU General Public License. Comments are copyright by thir respective owner. All other material are © 2002 .