Processed: Reopen: revise odd language in 'constitution.txt' -- "K Developers" ... "not integers"

2003-10-10 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> reopen 210879 !
Bug#210879: constitution.txt: revise odd language -- "K Developers"... "not 
integers"
Bug reopened, originator set to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Bug#210879: Reopen: revise odd language in 'constitution.txt' -- "K Developers" ... "not integers"

2003-10-10 Thread Alfie Costa 
reopen 210879 ! 

thanks 

M. Srivastava writes: 

> Please do not reopen this bug unless you have anything new to add. 

How do you know that there's nothing new in messages you HAVE NOT READ?  That's 
blacklisting.

Bug#210879: marked as done (constitution.txt: revise odd language -- "K Developers"... "not integers")

2003-10-10 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Fri, 10 Oct 2003 20:45:24 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line There was nothing new in the reopen message
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 14 Sep 2003 13:09:31 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Sep 14 08:09:29 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mx04.gis.net [208.218.130.12] 
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 19yWd7-000629-00; Sun, 14 Sep 2003 08:09:29 -0500
Received: from arf ([67.75.25.91]) by mx04.gis.net; Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:09:26 
-0400
Received: from alfie by Arf with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 19yWe2-0002qC-00; Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:10:26 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: A Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: constitution.txt: revise odd language -- "K Developers"... "not 
integers"
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.28
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:10:25 -0400
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: A Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-BadReturnPath: [EMAIL PROTECTED] rewritten as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  using "From" header
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0
tests=HAS_PACKAGE
version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_9_13
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_9_13 
(1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)

Package: doc-debian
Version: 3.0.2
Severity: wishlist


There's some odd language in '/usr/share/doc/debian/constitution.txt':

1   A resolution or amendment is introduced if proposed by any Developer
2   and sponsored by at least K other Developers...

...and the number 'K' is later defined, in part, as follows:

3   Q and K need not be integers and are not rounded.

This implies fractional Developers.  In line #2 above the author must
have meant an integer, (or rather a natural number -- there aren't any
negative numbers of Developers), but saying "at least" leaves room for
doubt, especially since line #3 says K isn't rounded!

Example: suppose K=4.4; but by line #3 'K' is not rounded, (if it were we'd
know a quorum would be at least 5, or 4.4 rounded up), and if it's not
rounded then .4 of a Developer means who knows what.

For line #3 I suggest changing 'integers' to 'natural numbers' or 'whole
numbers', and 'and are not rounded' to 'and are rounded up when counting
people, but not when counting votes.'  ...or something to the same
effect.

(Of course we all know a Constitution is by design not as easy to amend
as a garden variety typo.  Difficulty shouldn't justify errors though.)

Hope this helps us become wholly impartial.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux Arf 2.4.21-1-k6 #2 Mon Jun 16 22:19:43 EST 2003 i586
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (ignored: LC_ALL set to C)

-- no debconf information


---
Received: (at 210879-done) by bugs.debian.org; 11 Oct 2003 01:49:01 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 10 20:48:52 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from host-12-107-230-171.dtccom.net (glaurung.green-gryphon.com) 
[12.107.230.171] 
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1A88sE-0005pj-00; Fri, 10 Oct 2003 20:48:50 -0500
Received: from glaurung.green-gryphon.com ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])
by glaurung.green-gryphon.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-5) with ESMTP id 
h9B1jO6e007936
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 10 Oct 2003 20:45:25 -0500
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by glaurung.green-gryphon.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-5) id 
h9B1jOYB007932;
Fri, 10 Oct 2003 20:45:24 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: glaurung.green-gryphon.com: srivasta set sender to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.1 (via feedmail 8 I)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: There was nothing new in the reopen message
From: Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: The Debian Project
X-URL: http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/
User-Agent: Microsoft Gnus Express, Build 5.1003 (5.10.3)
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-Face: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/;Y^gTjR\T^"B'fbeuVGiyKrvbfKJl!^e|e:iu(kJ6c|QYB57LP*|t
 &YlP~HF/=h:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:6Cj0kd#4]>*D,|0djf'CVlXkI,>aV4\}?d_KEqsN{Nnt7
 78"OsbQ["56/!nisvyB/uA5Q.{)gm6?q.j71ww.>b9b]-sG8zNt%KkIa>xWg&1VcjZk[hBQ>]j~`Wq
 Xl,y1a!(>6`UM{~'X[Y_,Bv+}=L\SS*mA8=s;!=O`ja|@PEzb&i0}Qp,`Z\:6:OmRi*
Date: Fri,

Bug#210879: Reopen: revise odd language in 'constitution.txt' -- "K Developers" ... "not integers"

2003-10-10 Thread MJ Ray 
Stop this nonsense please.  I think you should demonstrate consensus 
on -project that there is a problem, then open a bug report and seek 
help to fix it.  However, your current reasoning is unconvincing.  K 
is a calculated figure, not a measure.


--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/

Processed: Reopen: revise odd language in 'constitution.txt' -- "K Developers" ... "not integers"

2003-10-10 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> reopen 210879 !
Bug#210879: constitution.txt: revise odd language -- "K Developers"... "not 
integers"
Bug reopened, originator set to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Bug#210879: Reopen: revise odd language in 'constitution.txt' -- "K Developers" ... "not integers"

2003-10-10 Thread Alfie Costa 
reopen 210879 ! 

thanks 

M. Srivastava writes:

> If you do find  anything substantive to add to the report,
> please do so.

My follow-up message to Burrows, which should be just after (or maybe 
just before, some emails get mixed up in transit) the "long rambling" 
one, should fit the bill.  Please try to have a look.  Unfortunately, 
due to my prolific ways, you've closed bug #210879 again, apparently 
without glancing at said message, so here we go again.

> The other reason to close this report is that the doc debian
> package can't itself do anything to fix this supposed flaw; it has no
> authority to modify the constitution. If the constitution needs to be

Of course; and I also noted that constitutions are pesky to fix in my 
first report.  

> changed, a constitutional amendment is going to be required; until thien
> this bug can be closed on the grounds that the package is distributing
> the constitution as it stands today.

But if there's a typo, it ought to be on permanent display somewhere, as 
a reminder, until its fixed, right?  Where else would you suggest?
Is there an appropriate pseudo package or buglist you know of?  I figured, 
"the file was in this package, so they ought to know where..."

Also, this bug is "wishlist".  What's the urgency in closing it quickly?

PS: on "personality" clashes... I agree that peace is better than war, but 
when the enemy shoots first, defense is no sin.

Re: Skolelinux and the "Debian Labs" idea

2003-10-10 Thread Matthias Urlichs 
Hi, Anthony Towns wrote:

> .au law is that you can't make donations for work on Debian
> tax deductible.

Why not?

In Germany, the way this works is that an organization sets up a list of
goals, and if these fall into some categories which define tax-exempt
status, the state grants that status to the organization (for a limited
time, subject to review); any activity of the organization which furthers
these goals is OK, thus donations earmarked for those activities are
also tax exempt.

Free Software isn't on the list of state-sanctioned goals per se, of
course, but some related goals and activities are (free public education,
for instance).

-- 
Matthias Urlichs   |   {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de   |  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de
 - -
INCOME VAX - What one shouts when the VAX is delivered.

Re: Skolelinux and the "Debian Labs" idea

2003-10-10 Thread Dylan Thurston 
On 2003-10-10, Anthony Towns  wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 04:58:22PM +, Dylan Thurston wrote:
>> On 2003-10-09, Anthony Towns  wrote:
>> > Even stuff packaged in non-free? How about stuff they maintain in
>> > non-free?
>> non-free is not part of Debian.
>
> Mmm, slogans. Given that...
>
>> >> Unpackaged/LSB, I think so, yeah.
>> > How about unpackaged stuff that they think's free, but debian-legal
>> > doesn't?
>> It would be unusual if debian-legal had actually taken a look at it?
>> On this issue, I think a small amount of things like this would be OK,
>> but too much would be bad. =20
>
>=2E..you think that stuff that's not even supported by Debian is okay,
> why do you think that having Debian Labs people even occassionally
> providing software that's "not part of Debian" is an isue?

I don't; did I imply that?  By "this issue", I meant to include the
non-free packages case above.  Sorry I wasn't clear.

Peace,
Dylan

Bug#155998: ENDEAVOUR TO USE IT FOR THE CHILDREN OF GOD

2003-10-10 Thread megyhatch 
From: Mrs Magret Hatch 

 PLEASE ENDEAVOUR TO USE IT FOR THE CHILDREN OF GOD. 

I am the above named person from Kuwait. I am married to Mr. Kazeem Hatch who 
worked with Kuwait embassy in Ivory Coast for nine years before he died in the 
year 2001.We were married for eleven years without a child. He died after a 
brief illness that lasted for only four days. Before his death we were both 
born again Christians.When my late husband was alive he deposited the sum 
of$5.6Million (Five Million six hundred  thousand U.S. Dollars) with one 
Pinnacle Finance/Security Company in Spain. Presently, this money is still with 
the Security  Company. 

Recently, my Doctor told me that I would not last for the next three months due 
to cancer problem. Though what disturbs me most is my  stroke. Having known my 
condition I decided to donate this fund to church or better still a christian 
individual that will utilize this money the way I am going to instruct here in. 
I want a church that will use this fund to fund churches, orphanages,Research 
centers and widows propagating the word of God and to ensure  that the house of 
God is maintained. The Bible made us to understand that Blessed is the hand 
that giveth. 

I took this decision because I dont have any child that will  inherit this 
money and my husband relatives are not Christians and I dont want my 
husbands hard earned money to be misused by unbelievers. I dont want a 
situation where this money will be used in an ungodly manner. Hence the 
reason for taking this bold decision. I am not afraid of death hence I know 
where I am going. I know that I am going to be in the bossom of the Lord. 
Exodus 14 VS 14 says that  the lord will fight my case and I shall hold my 
peace. I dont need any telephone communication in this regard because of my 
health because of the presence of my husbands relatives around me always. I 
dont want them to know about this development. With God all things are 
possible.  As soon as I receive your reply I shall give you the contact of the 
Pinnacle Finance/Security Company  in spain . I will also issue you a letter of 
authority that will empower you as the new beneficiary of this fund. 

I want you and the church to always pray for me because the lord is my 
shephard. My happiness is that I lived a life of a worthy Christian. Whoever 
that wants to serve the Lord must serve him in spirit and truth. Please always 
be prayerful all through your life. Any delay  in your reply will give me room 
in sourcing for a church or christian individual for this  same purpose. Please 
assure me that you will act accordingly as I  stated herein. Hoping to hear 
from you. 
You can also reach me on this address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Remain blessed in the name of the Lord. 

Yours in christ,
Mrs Magreth   Hatch.

Re: Bug#210879: marked as done (constitution.txt: revise odd language -- "K Developers"... "not integers")

2003-10-10 Thread Josip Rodin 
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 07:18:15PM -0500, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
>   The other reason to close this report is that the doc debian
>  package can't itself do anything to fix this supposed flaw; it has no
>  authority to modify the constitution. If the constitution needs to be
>  changed, a constitutional amendment is going to be required; until
>  thien this bug can be closed on the grounds that the package is
>  distributing the constitution as it stands today.

Mind you, that's why I (somewhat belatedly) reassigned it to project in the
first place.

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Re: Skolelinux and the "Debian Labs" idea

2003-10-10 Thread Anthony Towns 
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 04:58:22PM +, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> On 2003-10-09, Anthony Towns  wrote:
> >> > non-free on such machines? Unpackaged stuff? Stuff packaged locally? LSB
> >> > stuff? Proprietary stuff like win4lin or CrossoverOffice?
> >> non-free/proprietary stuff, better not. =20
> > Even stuff packaged in non-free? How about stuff they maintain in
> > non-free?
> non-free is not part of Debian.

Mmm, slogans. Given that...

> >> Unpackaged/LSB, I think so, yeah.
> > How about unpackaged stuff that they think's free, but debian-legal
> > doesn't?
> It would be unusual if debian-legal had actually taken a look at it?
> On this issue, I think a small amount of things like this would be OK,
> but too much would be bad.  

...you think that stuff that's not even supported by Debian is okay,
why do you think that having Debian Labs people even occassionally
providing software that's "not part of Debian" is an isue?

(If you really want to mindlessly trade slogans, then how about "although
non-free software isn't a part of Debian, we support its use" ? Why
is it a good idea for Debian Labs people to not abide by all of the
social contract?)

> > There are tax implications here [1]. The money goes:
> > donator * -> SPI * -> Lab -> employee *
> >   -> expenses
> >   -> profits *
> > with each "*" representing a point at which the government could end up
> > taking a cut. SPI being a tax-exempt non-profit allows the first to *'s to
> > disappear, if the appropriate rules are followed. ...
> Could somebody with a better understanding of the law help here?
> (Maybe that's you, aj, I'm just not sure.)

Note the .au in my email address. I don't have a lot of idea about
US law.  .au law is that you can't make donations for work on Debian
tax deductible.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review!
-- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda


pgpNY1W64BEg9.pgp
Description: PGP signature