En Linux Adictos We have been following the alternatives of Richard Stallman's return to the Free Software Foundation from the beginning. My partner Darkcrizt hizo a particularly good job reviewing the support and opposition generated by the event. One of them was the repercussion within the Debian Project.
Debian and Richard Stallman
I'm not saying it has something to do with it, but, relations between the project and the founder of the Free Software Foundation had their disagreements. Debian was always considered a champion free software distribution, but for RMS it was not enough.
The truth is that Steve Langasek, who also works for Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu, presented a draft general resolution for members of the Debian Project to join the signers of an existing letter that he wants Stallman to leave and the FSF board to be fired.
The vote is still in progress and The results will be known on April 17.
Voters can choose from six options:
- Demand the resignation of the entire steering committee (This is what the original letter asks for)
- Request Stallman's resignation from any position within the Free Software Foundation.
- Discard any kind of collaboration with the Free Software Foundation while Stallman is in a managerial position.
- Ask the FSF to improve its governance mechanisms.
- Support the reinstatement of Richard Stallman.
- Report the witch hunt against Stallman
There is also the alternative of doing nothing.
Sam Hartman, former Debian project leader, and one of the signers of Stallman's resignation request, minimized support for the bearded programmer within the entity
The proposal to sign the letter of support to Richard Stallman was presented on March 26 and obtained the last necessary endorsement on April 1 (six days later and after the minimum debate period had elapsed) .That proposal took several days to get the minimum of five supports necessary to appear inside the vote.
By contrast, the removal proposal obtained the necessary support in less than an hour.
If one of the proponents of another proposal on the ballot had called for a vote earlier (as our constitution allows after the minimum discussion period), the proposal to sign the letter of support for Stallman would not even have been on the ballot.
To be considered any of these proposals you need to reach a quorum during the voting period. That is, about 50 developers must approve it.
To my liking, Hartman was quite dismissive of those in the opposite position:
We have seen many messages in support of Stallman on our lists. I have not looked at statistics. There seems to be a small number of people writing a ton of messages encouraging people to support their position.
It makes sense for Stallman supporters to spend more time campaigning. Those who asked for the resignation got what they needed at the beginning of the process. His option was already on the ballot.
By writing many messages, advocates for resignation prolong what is a difficult and emotional process. I don't think I was the only one wanting to focus on refining the text of the options I supported and letting the voters choose for themselves. I think enough of us have experience with Stallman to decide for ourselves.
Hartman said to keep in mind that many of the messages of support for Stallman come from people who were not Debian developers and therefore do not have the right to vote.
On the 17th we will see what happens, for the moment, the only known statistic indicates that removal is supported by 61 organizations and 3013 individuals, not counting the top 16 signatories. Fourteen organizations have released their own statements, all calling for Stallman to leave.
Stallman's supporters have submitted their own letter asking him to remain on the board. From its submission, a total of 5620 signatures were obtained.