Sam Hartman dijo [Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 05:19:09PM -0400]:
> I suspect that the issues surrounding the open letter asking rms to step
> down and for the FSF board to resign are fairly well understood at this
> point.
> It's been an ongoing issue.
>
> I don't think we're going to get much benefit
Em 24/03/2021 18:53, Jonathan Carter escreveu:
I'm comfortable making a statement on behalf of the project if
necessary. On this particular issue, I feel it's better that individual
developers go and make their voices heard. That said, I will also
respect the outcome of the GR and follow it if
Quoting M dB (2021-03-24 23:55:23)
> A few thoughts:
>
> - I don't like the term "cancel" because I think it doesn't mean much
> anymore and is too loaded.
Means too little and too much at the same time?!?
https://www.dictionary.com/e/pop-culture/cancel-culture/ describes it as
a form of
A few thoughts:
- I don't like the term "cancel" because I think it doesn't mean much
anymore and is too loaded. Are we discussing a handful of people leaving
volunteer positions? Yes. Are we discussing ruining their lives? No.
- I think some of us have been very close to the FSF and issues
Isn't it funny how in threads discussing social justice there are always
the same opinions coming from the same names, time and time again?
One or two more of the usual names and arguments and I fill my bingo card!
From: Adam Borowski
I'm also disgusted with such hatred towards the
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 12:13:19AM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> On 2021/03/24 23:19, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > I suspect that the issues surrounding the open letter asking rms to step
> > down and for the FSF board to resign are fairly well understood at this
> > point.
> > It's been an ongoing
On 3/24/21 10:20 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I don't think we're going to get much benefit out of a prolonged
> discussion, and I think that there is significant benefit in acting
> quickly in this instance.
By writing you wish Debian was "acting quickly", you're expressing your
opinion about the
On 2021/03/24 23:19, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I suspect that the issues surrounding the open letter asking rms to step
> down and for the FSF board to resign are fairly well understood at this
> point.
> It's been an ongoing issue.
>
> I don't think we're going to get much benefit out of a prolonged
On 3/24/21 10:00 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement which I believe Debian
Sorry, for some reason I didn't get Gunnar's original mail so going to
reply here...
On 2021/03/24 02:24, M dB wrote:
>> https://opensource.org/OSI_Response
>> https://rms-open-letter.github.io/
>>
>> Now, as for my question: I thought repeatedly over the last couple of
>> days whether to
Confirmed.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021, 5:33 PM Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote :
> > > Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the
> body
> > > who
On 3/23/21 10:20 AM, Bart Martens wrote:
> Hello DPL candidates,
>
> A question about diversity. We all know that some profiles are
> underrepresented: gender, etnic group, disability, age, sexual preference,
> education degree, rich/poor, spoken & written languages...
>
> 1/ One way of
Sam Hartman, 2021-03-24 17:19 -0400:
> I suspect that the issues surrounding the open letter asking rms to step
> down and for the FSF board to resign are fairly well understood at this
> point.
> It's been an ongoing issue.
>
> I don't think we're going to get much benefit out of a prolonged
>
On 16082 March 1977, Steve Langasek wrote:
I accept an amendment to include the word "board" (which was missed on
accident by me) and would ask the seconders to confirm their
acceptance of
this amendment so we can avoid any unnecessary extra variations on the
GR
ballot.
Confirmed.
--
bye,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
is a statement which I believe Debian as a
On 24/03/2021 21:33, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I accept an amendment to include the word "board" (which was missed on
> accident by me) and would ask the seconders to confirm their acceptance of
> this amendment so we can avoid any unnecessary extra variations on the GR
> ballot.
amendment also
On 2021-03-24 17 h 33, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote :
>>> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
>>> who has the power to issue
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 02:33:19PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
>
>> Seconded.
>
>> (I'll also second an amended text with s/FSF/FSF board/ or equivalent
>> correction)
>
>I accept an amendment to include the word "board" (which
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:16:44PM +0100, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote :
> > Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> > who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
> >
> >
On 16082 March 1977, Sam Hartman wrote:
I don't think we're going to get much benefit out of a prolonged
discussion, and I think that there is significant benefit in acting
quickly in this instance.
So, I'd like to ask the DPL to consider shortening the discussion
period.
And for whatever it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
>
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement which I believe
On 24/03/2021 20:54, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement which I believe Debian
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote :
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
> https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
> is a statement
I suspect that the issues surrounding the open letter asking rms to step
down and for the FSF board to resign are fairly well understood at this
point.
It's been an ongoing issue.
I don't think we're going to get much benefit out of a prolonged
discussion, and I think that there is significant
On 23/03/21 2:41 pm, Bart Martens wrote:
> Hello DPL candidates,
>
> A question about diversity. We all know that some profiles are
> underrepresented: gender, etnic group, disability, age, sexual preference,
> education degree, rich/poor, spoken & written languages...
>
> 1/ One way of
> "Steve" == Steve Langasek writes:
Steve> Text of GR
Steve> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard
Steve> Stallman's readmission to the FSF seen at
Steve>
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
>who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
>https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
>is a statement which I
Please, as a previous vote runner, can we only have 5 seconders rather
than the (currently) 82 DDs who have signed it so far?
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:54:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Text of GR
>
> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
>
On 16082 March 1977, Steve Langasek wrote:
Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the
body
who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
is a statement which I believe Debian as a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 2021-03-24 16 h 54, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
> who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
>
Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the body
who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
https://github.com/rms-open-letter/rms-open-letter.github.io/blob/main/index.md
is a statement which I believe Debian as a project, and not just individual
Debian
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:38:25PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Freedom of speech does *not* mean freedom from consequences.
>
> If you say unpopular, controversial things then it's entirely
> reasonable that people around you may evaluate you based on what
> you've said. They may decide that
Hi Bart
On 2021/03/23 11:11, Bart Martens wrote:
> A question about diversity. We all know that some profiles are
> underrepresented: gender, etnic group, disability, age, sexual preference,
> education degree, rich/poor, spoken & written languages...
>
> 1/ One way of addressing this, is
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:38:25PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>...
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:32:31PM +0100, Gerardo Ballabio wrote:
> >Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> >> Inclusivity and tolerance does not mean we have to accept every opinion as
> >> equally valid.
> >
> >Equally valid -- no.
>
On 24.03.21 15:37, Simon Richter wrote:
> The vast majority of the software we ship works fine with a two-line
> systemd unit and three debhelper control files, and that is exactly what we
> should be using for these cases, but we cannot generalize that to a
> requirement, and people wishing to
Hello Jonathan,
On Mon 22 Mar 2021 at 07:57PM +02, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> I admit I don't know how to use either properly and have somehow
> managed to get away with it, but I do plan on learning how to use dgit
> if I can find a good primer on it
dgit-maint-gbp(7) is probably what you want.
On 2021-03-24 10 h 37, Simon Richter wrote:
> The vast majority of the software we ship works fine with a two-line
> systemd unit and three debhelper control files, and that is exactly what we
> should be using for these cases, but we cannot generalize that to a
> requirement, and people wishing
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 09:08:14PM +0100, Christian Kastner wrote:
> The (1) adoption of debhelper by my most packages and (2) the move to
> Salsa have been an absolute blessing. They have made contributing to
> other packages so much easier.
We have multiple standards at different
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 02:05:35PM -0400, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> Even if we don't ultimately enforce it, being able to point people an
> officially recommended way to create packages in Debian would be a large
> step forward.
I'd expect this to be found in
Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Hello,
I hope not to be too inflamatory with this. As you are surely aware,
last week Richard Stallman was reinstated as part of the Board of
Directors of the FSF. That is something deeply disturbing and
confidence-shattering for many of us.
If anything, it's about time to
Do we really have to go through this argument *again*?
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:32:31PM +0100, Gerardo Ballabio wrote:
>Matthias Klumpp wrote:
>> Inclusivity and tolerance does not mean we have to accept every opinion as
>> equally valid.
>
>Equally valid -- no.
>Legitimate to express -- yes.
Quoting Gerardo Ballabio (2021-03-24 12:32:31)
> Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> > Inclusivity and tolerance does not mean we have to accept every opinion as
> > equally valid.
>
> Equally valid -- no.
> Legitimate to express -- yes.
>
> I am really worried about the increasing trend (not specific to
Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> Inclusivity and tolerance does not mean we have to accept every opinion as
> equally valid.
Equally valid -- no.
Legitimate to express -- yes.
I am really worried about the increasing trend (not specific to
Debian) towards demanding that people who hold "dissenting"
Adam Borowski writes:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 04:56:39PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I hope not to be too inflamatory with this. As you are surely aware,
>> last week Richard Stallman was reinstated as part of the Board of
>> Directors of the FSF. That is something deeply
On Ma, 23 mar 21, 16:40:32, Gard Spreemann wrote:
>
> That's a good point, I agree. What about packages that we have lost
> interest in, but that our users very much have not? Admittedly, I have
> no idea of what the cardinality of that intersection is.
[just a user here]
If such packages and
On 24/03/21 4:26 am, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I hope not to be too inflamatory with this. As you are surely aware,
> last week Richard Stallman was reinstated as part of the Board of
> Directors of the FSF. That is something deeply disturbing and
> confidence-shattering for many of us.
>
>
On 24/03/21 5:52 am, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> No human can do anything that makes them immune to criticism. This is
> not a matter of hate, I actually doubt anyone who signed the petition
> really "hates" RMS.
> RMS without a doubt did a lot of good with starting the FSF and his
> early work on
47 matches
Mail list logo
