quirements?
[CRA] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0130_EN.html
Thanks for running for DPL to both of you!
-- Santiago
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
and PLD proposals include regulations detrimental to FOSS
> >
>
> This would be real-english-english? ;-) If it has the same meaning, fine
> by me. I've pinged Santiago.
I fully trust Russ's English skills :-)
LGTM.
Thank you!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
El 02/12/23 a las 01:07, Bill Allombert escribió:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 04:36:29PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > Bill Allombert dijo [Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:07:29PM +0100]:
> > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 09:25:17AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > > > This is also something we discussed before
ial Contract No. 2, 3 and 4
+(2) Debian Social Contract No. 2, 3 and 4
https://www.debian.org/social_contract
Thank you all,
-- Santiago
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
silience-act-new-cybersecurity-rules-for-digital-products-and-ancillary-services/F3376542_en
+Detailed analysis:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13410-Cyber-resilience-act-new-cybersecurity-rules-for-digital-products-and-ancillary-services/F3376542_en
(3) Debian Social Contract No. 2, 3 and 4
https://www.debian.org/social_contract
Cheers,
-- Santiago
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Thanks to those who have spotted errors and have proposed fixes!
I am collecting more patches, and I will send an updated proposal as
soon as possible. But I won't be able to do it earlier than tomorrow
Wednesday, when I will be in the Northern hemisphere.
El 21/11/23 a las 12:01, Miriam Ruiz
t; > Second version, taking into account feedback. Looking for seconds at
> > this point:
>
> Maybe Santiago wants to adopt this text, rather than having 2 options?
The initial proposal was made collectively, and now I realise I should
have signed with a "On behalf of the Debian fellows
El 15/11/23 a las 00:49, Luca Boccassi escribió:
> On Sun, 2023-11-12 at 12:10 -0300, Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote:
> > Dear Debian Fellows,
> >
> > Following the email sent by Ilu to debian-project (Message-ID:
> > <4b93ed08-f148-4c7f-b172-f967f7de7...@gmx.net&g
security-rules-for-digital-products-and-ancillary-services/F3376542_en
(3) Debian Social Contract No. 2, 3 and 4
https://www.debian.org/social_contract
- GENERAL RESOLUTION ENDS -
Cheers,
-- Santiago
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
d mailing lists).
>
> Thereby re-inforcing the interpretation that any installer or image with
> non-free software on it is not part of the Debian system, but that we
> support their use and welcome others to distribute such work.
>
> ==
I won't vote for this, but I think it is important to have this option
on the ballot.
Seconded,
-- Santiago
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
El 04/03/22 a las 12:03, Mattia Rizzolo escribió:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 10:42:51AM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > Reaffirm public voting
> > ==
> >
> > Since we can either have secret and intransparent voting, or we can have
> > open and transparent voting, the project
El 31/03/21 a las 20:14, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz escribió:
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 19:53 Enrico Zini wrote:
> > Hello Debian Members,
> >
> > For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR
> > discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need
> > to be.
both with the FSF and any other organisation in which
> >>> Richard
> >>> Stallman has a leading position.
> >> Hi Santiago,
> >>
> >> I know this is more of a question about the original FSFE statement with
> >> this phrasing, but sinc
El 29/03/21 a las 14:51, Santiago R.R. escribió:
> Hi,
>
> This is mostly Sruthi Chandran's proposed amendment, with minor tweaks
> and without asking for resignation. I am proposing this because I don't
> want Debian tells other organisations what to do (small differenc
Hi,
This is mostly Sruthi Chandran's proposed amendment, with minor tweaks
and without asking for resignation. I am proposing this because I don't
want Debian tells other organisations what to do (small difference that
for me is important).
Choice X: Debian is unable to collaborate with FSF
===
El 26/03/21 a las 13:26, Dominik George escribió:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:50:31AM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > [replying only to -vote - please avoid cross-posting!]
>
> OK, but you actually replied only to -devel instead of -vote.
>
> >
> > Quoting Dominik George
ances of the word Chairman shall be replaced with the word Chair.
>
> === END GR TEXT ===
Seconded.
Thanks!
Santiago
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Greetings,
This is an email to notify you that you have been accepted into our
Lowest_Mortgage_Rate program.
Please visit the following link to complete your application which has been
pre-approved.
http://loanpoly.com/?partid=wh6
Thank You
Tamera
Senior Mortgage Consultant
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 06:57:09PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
mocka BSD-style license with noxious advertising clause. why is this
in non-free?
This does look like a mistaken categorization to me; to my eye, the
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 06:57:09PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
mocka BSD-style license with noxious advertising clause. why is
this
in non-free?
This does look like a mistaken categorization to me; to my eye, the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Andrew Suffield wrote:
The next release of Debian will not be accompanied by a non-free
section; there will be no more stable releases of the non-free
section. The Debian project will cease active support of the non-free
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Andrew Suffield wrote:
The next release of Debian will not be accompanied by a non-free
section; there will be no more stable releases of the non-free
section. The Debian project will cease active support of the non-free
Susan Kleinmann wrote:
I have found a few sentences in the debian constitution·
http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution
which seem incomplete or just wrong to me, so I wonder what's the
name of the package to which I should submit the bug report.
Please respond to me as well as the list,
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Santiago My points is that posting to a mailing list should be a
Santiago privilege, not a right.
I strongly disagree. We are vendors who provide an OS. I know
we do not treat users as customers, but being a debian user is not a
privilege.
Of course
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
The answer is not to treat legitimate users like dirt, and
force them to use the subscribe address (my subscribe address is
never the address I post from).
No, you could subscribe the address you post from to the white list.
Smartlist then
On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Santiago Unless you change ISP several times a week, this would not be a
Santiago problem for you, Manoj.
I change ISP's several times a month, and, indeed, sometimes
use more than 2 a week.
Well, but most people don't do that.
Can you
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
The answer is not to treat legitimate users like dirt, and
force them to use the subscribe address (my subscribe address is
never the address I post from).
No, you could subscribe the address you post from to the white list.
Smartlist then
On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Santiago Unless you change ISP several times a week, this would not be a
Santiago problem for you, Manoj.
I change ISP's several times a month, and, indeed, sometimes
use more than 2 a week.
Well, but most people don't do that.
Can you
Draft. Comments welcome. Please Cc the list, not me.
Those who have in Debian the power to do so, will implement the following:
To avoid spammers harvesting addresses from the list archives:
- The public web archives
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Adam Heath wrote:
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Santiago Vila wrote:
Those who have in Debian the power to do so, will implement the following:
The rest of your email is ignorable, because the above is blatantly wrong.
You can't force anyone to do anything, period.
If you
Enough comments.
I withdraw my proposal (better said: I won't make it official).
Thanks everybody.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Draft. Comments welcome. Please Cc the list, not me.
Those who have in Debian the power to do so, will implement the following:
To avoid spammers harvesting addresses from the list archives:
- The public web archives
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Adam Heath wrote:
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Santiago Vila wrote:
Those who have in Debian the power to do so, will implement the following:
The rest of your email is ignorable, because the above is blatantly wrong.
You can't force anyone to do anything, period.
If you want
Enough comments.
I withdraw my proposal (better said: I won't make it official).
Thanks everybody.
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 04:29:15PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
Branden Robinson wrote:
Nevertheless, if elected DPL, I realize that I turn the temperature
down on my occasional email flame of a fellow developer. That's a
sacrifice I'm willing
Branden Robinson wrote:
Nevertheless, if elected DPL, I realize that I turn the temperature
down on my occasional email flame of a fellow developer. That's a
sacrifice I'm willing to make.
It's funny that someone who wants to be the Project Leader uses the
word "sacrifice" here.
--
To
Branden Robinson wrote:
Nevertheless, if elected DPL, I realize that I turn the temperature
down on my occasional email flame of a fellow developer. That's a
sacrifice I'm willing to make.
It's funny that someone who wants to be the Project Leader uses the
word sacrifice here.
unzip should be in main now - it's now got a free license.
Clarification: unzip is in non-US/main in woody, for those who didn't find it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unzip should be in main now - it's now got a free license.
Clarification: unzip is in non-US/main in woody, for those who didn't find it.
The problem is:
(a) A group of developers don't think the social contract can
legally (according to the constitution) be modified
(b) A group of developers think modification of the social contract
should require a supermajority
(c) A group of
I wrote:
* Our constitution is incomplete because there is not a constitutional
way to determine whether something is constitutional or not. We would need
to amend it and create a constitutional court of justice.
Ooops! I have just been pointed out that this is not true, because of
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, you wrote:
On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 12:22:58PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
5.Issue nontechnical policy documents and statements.
These include documents describing the goals of the project, its
relationship with other free software entities, and nontechnical
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 7 Jun 2000, John Goerzen wrote:
Debian General Resolution
Resolved:
A. That the Debian Social Contract with the Free Software Community be
amended as follows:
1. That text of Section 5 be modified to read: We acknowledge that
some of our
43 matches
Mail list logo
