On Wed 2023-11-22 19:31:34 +, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Le Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 07:16:48PM +0100, Bart Martens a écrit :
>>
>> The Debian project asks the EU to not draw a line between commercial
>> and non-commercial use of FOSS.
>
> But the EU already does, all the time, really. This is
On Thu 2021-11-11 07:56:24 -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> 1/ The assertion "we all can acknowledge is confused and outdated" is
>far fom the case. This and other discussions on the matter are
>strong evidence that "we can all acknowledge" is a
>mischaracterization.
I'm
On Sat 2021-11-06 11:32:35 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Pierre-Elliott Bécue - 06.11.21, 11:06:58 CET:
>> That being said, the name is indeed outdated, and "Debian Archive
>> Team" sounds quite nice.
>
> Agreed. I like this name.
Yes, please. "Debian Archive Team" is fine. This is fair
On Fri 2019-03-22 09:32:55 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I'm probably missing something, but it doesn't sound like a lot of work
> to me? It's "just" a service that:
> - gets notified of the existence of a git repo + tag to upload
> - fetches that git repo + tag
> - checks signature / confirm
On Mon 2019-04-01 15:17:27 -0400, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> On 19-03-31 03 h 39, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>>
>> Statement: every Debian package must be maintained in Git on salsa and
>> every Debian Developer with upload rights to the archive should have
>> commit/push right to every
On Tue 2019-03-12 08:45:46 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bdale Garbee writes:
>
>> Chris, thank you for your service! Two terms as DPL is a serious
>> contribution and commitment to Debian, and I greatly appreciate it!
>
> +1. Thank you so much for everything you've done for Debian over the past
On Thu 2016-07-21 11:15:57 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> A "Chairman" is a person. A "Chair" may be an object.
>
> I don't think anyone will misinterpret your proposed new wording into
> thinking the TC has a physical chair that someone sits on, but the
> s/Chairmain/Chair/ you apply does to me
On 12/02/2014 06:13 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
This is an interesting proposal. But it's a big change, so I think it
should be thoroughly discussed before I could second it.
I agree some discussion would be useful, but seems like it's a lot
simpler than all the other noodling with term-limits that
On 10/17/2014 10:33 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
If the fix is not easy then we have three options: the release team
mark it `jessie-ignore', the GNOME maintainers fix it, or GNOME is
removed from jessie.
The implication here appears to be troubling for any upstream who wants
to rely on specific
On 10/17/2014 03:44 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Hi,
It is now clear that we will have a vote on this issue. I think that we
should use this opportunity to clarify the Project's position, and that's
not something that would be achieved if Further Discussion were to
win.
I am therefore
On 10/17/2014 11:26 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes (Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of
init systems):
The implication here appears to be troubling for any upstream who wants
to rely on specific features of a given initsystem.
Yes, indeed.
The implication
On 10/17/2014 12:06 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes (Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of
init systems):
nevertheless, runit behaves differently when it is pid 1 than when it is
used in a subordinate role to another initsystem. If i'm upstream and
i'm building
On 03/29/2013 01:46 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 01:35:59PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
I'm open to other theories as to the cause. I am, however, a bit surprised
that you'd completely dismiss the theory I've proposed so quickly.
let you know that I regularly bump
On 03/23/2010 11:03 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
The second option aims at clarifying what is the source of the Debian
operating
system. It is controversial.
To some of us, the Debian operating system is at least as much about
the packaged source as it is about the packaged binaries.
If you
Hi Wouter--
You probably didn't mean to have this to come out this way, but:
On 03/23/2010 01:49 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Charles:
In your platform, in the Program section, you mention four ideas that
could reasonable be described as being about the things that,
respectively, the DAM and
15 matches
Mail list logo
