Branden Robinson Releases 3rd DPL Report

A anonymous reader writes "Branden Robinson has posted his third report as Debian Project Leader. This report covers the Sarge release, the status of security support, delegation activities, Mozilla Firefox trademark license, the need for community donation for a new hosting site and new hardware, and more."

Comments

transparent democracy in action

[hamanu]

if only the bush administration was this open.

Re:transparent democracy in action

[hamanu]

here you go:

of course you may have to use the wayback machine on those URLs

http://www.awolbush.com/kerry-vs-bush.asp

Re:transparent democracy in action

[corrosive_nf]

In addition...

On February 18, 1966, Kerry obligated himself to a six-year commitment to the Navy, and to the tenets of the military judicial system, with an expiration date of July 1, 1972. On January 3, 1970, Kerry asked for, and was granted, an early transfer from his active duty service to the Naval Reserve. As a reservist, he was still under oath as a commissioned officer and subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He still carried a military ID card and was still a member of the U.S. armed forces. Kerry's service commitment came to an end, as scheduled, in July, 1972. As such, a DD Form 214 with a discharge status was due.

Kerry's "honorable" discharge, though, doesn't come until February 16, 1978. Why? Possibly because President Jimmy Carter, through Proclamation 4483, granted a full and complete pardon to all military personnel who committed offenses and violations of the Military Selective Service Act during the Vietnam War. He pardoned deserters, draft dodgers and those who went absent without leave (AWOL).

Interestingly, Kerry's honorable discharge letter from the Department of the Navy, dated February 16, 1978, notes that Kerry's discharge was taken "by direction of the President" and "with the approved recommendations of a board of officers convened under the authority of reference [10 USC Sec. 1163] to examine the official records of officers of the Naval Reserve.." This is extremely unusual. Review boards are not convened for discharges and certainly not "by direction of the President." The "authority of reference," 10 USC Sec. 1163, refers to "the grounds for involuntary separation from the service." What was being reviewed, then, was Kerry's involuntary separation from the service or, more likely, the disposition of his service. This simply would not have occurred if Kerry's discharge in 1972 had been "honorable." Why did Kerry's discharge meet a board? In all likelihood, he sought relief to improve his status of discharge from "dishonorable" or "less than honorable" to "honorable." If he signed his Form 180, we'd know. If he'd release his DD214 from 1972, we'd know.

Re:transparent democracy in action

[hamanu]

All wonderfull questions, and all besides the point that I wish the bush administration was more open.

As for Kerry's discharge, I seem to remember a guy by the name of Nixon who tried to have kerry ruined for his testimony before the senate against the war. Who knows what tricks he might have played via command pressure? not me. I also don't know what tricks bush played regarding his service. Seeing as Bush is president (not kerry), and bush started a war (not kerry) I think the questions about Bush ACTIONS are more important than questions about kerrys character.

Re:transparent democracy in action

[corrosive_nf]

kerry commited what ammounted to treason during the vietnam war. How can you say it wasnt about his character.

Re:transparent democracy in action

[hamanu]

how can I?

two ways:

1) I said questions about bush's actions are more important than questions about kerry's character, so your objection is misplaced.

2) treason is giving aid to the enemy, as in getting your own guys killed so that the other guys can win. If speaking out against a unnecessary war qualifies as wanting the other side to win, or qualifies as killing your own guys, then lots of us are guilty of treason, and some may argue that being treacherous (by your definition) is morally obligated, making those of us who are not traitors the bad guys.

In summary, hatred of kerry, whether rational or irrational doesn't change the fact that the bush administration is too closed for many people's likings. For instance Why are the names of the people on Cheney's energy task force secret? Why on earth should that be a secret? Hating kerry doesn't fill the void left by those nagging questions.

Anyway slashdot must be broken for us to be having this discussion between the 2 of us.

Re:transparent democracy in action

[croddy]

This thread is something seriously less than I expected. Where are the Offtopic mods when we need them?

sigh.

Open source versus the health of his wife.

[CyricZ]

I wish the best to his wife, Michelle. As he indicates, she has been hospitalized twice over the past month.

Indeed, this report truly shows the communal-individualistic nature of the open source community. Not only do we provide each other with amazing software, but as a community we are able to help each other out a great deal. In the corporate world you don't often find the sort of comraderie that is prevalent in the open source community. People matter, at the individual level.

I'm sure we'll all forgive him that he was a bit late in delivering this report.

Aside from

[WebHostingGuy]

all the offtopic non-linux posts I do think it is interesting and relevant that Debian has listened to the people using the distro and have addressed the problems. You usually do not see such a fast response to security issues and problems. It is obvious that the leadership of Debian is concerned for the users and the future of Debian.

Cheers to Debian!

Sad

[pintpusher]

As a loyal and satisfied Debian user, I gotta say this is really sad. A whopping 11 comments (at this time) for a story about one of the [subjective comment follows] most successful open source OS's out there. Sad.

Of course, it was posted on a saturday...