On 15337 March 1977, Zlatan Todorić wrote:
So, funny, maybe we will live to our long history of community
fostering (which is the thing I most enjoy from Debian, besides that
we produce kickass OS) and be leaderless as we in all nature of
project actually are.
While the idea of going
/usr/bin/dpl \
--mode supervised-learning \
--training-input debian-de...@lists.debian.org \
--training-input debian-proj...@lists.debian.org \
--training-input debian-vote@lists.debian.org \
--authorized-peers /usr/share/keyrings/debian-keyring.gpg \
--authorized-peers
Hi all,
On 10.03.19 18:48, Zlatan Todorić wrote:
maybe we will live to our long history of community fostering (which is
the thing I most enjoy from Debian, besides that we produce kickass OS)
and be leaderless as we in all nature of project actually are.
If this ("leaderless as we in all
(sorry for top posting)
So, funny, maybe we will live to our long history of community fostering (which
is the thing I most enjoy from Debian, besides that we produce kickass OS) and
be leaderless as we in all nature of project actually are.
Doesn't sound too bad to me,
Z
;)
On March 10,
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 01:48:23PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 15337 March 1977, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> > In fairness, I'd recommend that the nominations period be extended for
> > some explicit time. I think that we want to have a known window for new
> > nominations rather than say
Hi,
Since there were no candidates during the nomination period, the
nomination period has been extended by 1 week.
The new time line looks like:
| Period | Start | End |
|+---+-|
| Nomination | Sunday 2019-03-03 |
On 15337 March 1977, Sam Hartman wrote:
In fairness, I'd recommend that the nominations period be extended for
some explicit time. I think that we want to have a known window for new
nominations rather than say starting the campaigning as soon as someone
nominates themselves.
§5.2.4 to the
We seem to have reached the end of the nominations period with no Debian
developers stepping forward to nominate themselves. As has been
discussed, the nomination in
is not
valid because the person nominating themselves is not a developer.
In fairness, I'd recommend that the nominations period
On 10/03/2019 04:44, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> This is an obviously untrue signature.
>
Why do you want to taint the elections with more bullying, insulting and
disrespectful comments?
9 matches
Mail list logo
