On 2013-03-19 16:39, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
Dear candidates, do you think that libechonest [3] should be called
free
software? As it requires software outside of the distribution to
function, do you think it should be moved to contrib? What about
s3cmd [4] then?
I don't think that having the
Bart Martens ba...@debian.org writes:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:27:58AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
You can use flashplugin-nonfree to download a piece of software that has
a nonfree license, which is then installed on your system; the result is
that you now have a system which has some
On 03/21/2013 11:52 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote:
I think the outcome of moving a package that falls in the requires
external stuff from main to contrib would rarely qualify as silly.
Take for example the twitter perl packages. The API is changing (of
course that is something outside of
On 03/21/2013 02:02 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 03/21/2013 11:52 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote:
I think the outcome of moving a package that falls in the requires
external stuff from main to contrib would rarely qualify as silly.
Take for example the twitter perl packages. The API is changing
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 02:07:40AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:39:29PM +0100, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
3. One test I've been taught to use to reason about free software is the
Desert Island test [2] which
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:39:29PM +0100, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
1. Some software Debian distribute are actually only useful when
connected to the Internet to access services for which the
source code is unavailable.
2. The Debian policy states (emphasis is mine):
# 2.2.2 The
On Mi, 20 mar 13, 06:47:32, Bart Martens wrote:
Good question. See also for example bug 681659. I don't know why
pidgin-facebookchat would belong in section main while flashplugin-nonfree
would belong section contrib. Both packages contain software that can freely
be redistributed but
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 05:09:00PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
note that free software interfaces to proprietary cloud platforms
are frequently used to manipulate the data in those platforms including
pull data *out* of those platforms. It would be quite ironic if we
refused to include in the
Hi Bart,
On 20-03-13 07:47, Bart Martens wrote:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:39:29PM +0100, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
Dear candidates, do you think that libechonest [3] should be called free
software? As it requires software outside of the distribution to
function, do you think it should be moved to
Steve Langasek:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:39:29PM +0100, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
3. One test I've been taught to use to reason about free software is the
Desert Island test [2] which starts by:
Imagine a castaway on a desert island with a solar-powered
computer.
Bart Martens ba...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 05:09:00PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
note that free software interfaces to proprietary cloud platforms are
frequently used to manipulate the data in those platforms including
pull data *out* of those platforms. It would be quite
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:27:58AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
You can use flashplugin-nonfree to download a piece of software that has
a nonfree license, which is then installed on your system; the result is
that you now have a system which has some non-DFSG-free software
installed. To be
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:35:19AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bart Martens ba...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 05:09:00PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
note that free software interfaces to proprietary cloud platforms are
frequently used to manipulate the data in those platforms
Bart Martens ba...@debian.org writes:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:27:58AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
You can use pidgin-facebookchat to talk to a non-free service; but
whatever you do, the result will *never* be that you end up with a
system which has some non-DFSG-free software installed.
Jérémy Bobbio lu...@debian.org writes:
I'll need to come up with other tools to think about the danger about
freedom I perceive from the “cloud”…
For the record, I think most of us are on the same page about the danger.
I certainly agree with your concern; I'm just not sure that the
Bart Martens ba...@debian.org writes:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:35:19AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bart Martens ba...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 05:09:00PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
note that free software interfaces to proprietary cloud platforms are
frequently used to
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
Bart Martens ba...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 05:09:00PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
note that free software interfaces to proprietary cloud platforms are
frequently used to manipulate the data in those
Hi all,
I propose that either the discussion is reshaped to be more interactive with
the candidates, or it is moved to another channel where a broader participation
is expected.
Cheers,
--
Charles
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:39:29PM +0100, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
3. One test I've been taught to use to reason about free software is the
Desert Island test [2] which starts by:
Imagine a castaway on a desert island with a solar-powered
computer.
Obviously, software that are
19 matches
Mail list logo
