Re: [GNU-linux-libre] what of the distros that have already asked for consideration or have been partially evaluated?

[bill-auger]

On 03/22/2018 03:30 PM, Donald Robertson wrote:
> But we don't have to assume that
> is needed just because a lot of time has passed.
> 

i think that is a valid concern though - to allow for some "on-hold"
phase and for when it becomes clear that the distro maintainers are
expressing no interest or making significant  progress towards
addressing issues - i propose this as an addendum to the protocol
description if this sounds reasonable to everyone:


----------------------------------

* If at any time, it becomes clear that no significant progress is being
made toward addressing documented criteria discrepancies or
deficiencies, the application manager or the FSF licensing team may move
the distro's entry to the list under the 'Distros that are defunct or do
not comply with the GNU FSDG' heading; where they may sit indefinitely.
This could be considered as an some reasonably brief amount of time
(perhaps to assign a new application manager or grace period for the
distro maintainers to respond); but unless there is timely objection or
discussion by the distro maintainers, this may conclude the review
process and the application manager may be relieved of it's over-sight.
After the application manager steps down, the distro would need to
re-apply to the GNU webmasters to re-start the process. The state of the
checklist page and notes should be retained in order to inform future
reviewers or those who may fork or otherwise assume stewardship of the
distro.

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature