Re: Why Debian Common Core Alliance? Why not Debian?
On 8/22/05, Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote: [snip mostly sensible stuff] I certainly hope not, at least until you've learnt where the boundary is between speaking on behalf of yourself and speaking on behalf of Debian. The above crosses it, eg -- what makes you think Debian wants to accept as an official subproject a group who issues press releases claiming to be Debian Core when, you know, you're not? Or, even if we want to accept such a group, what makes you think we could trust it? This seems a little harsh. As near as I can tell (I have no involvement) the DCC folks are the Debian-package-system-using subset of the LCC that Bruce Perens floated here a few months ago, and it's understandable that they would s/Linux/Debian/ without too much thought. While I don't think much of the LCC as proposed (I think promising golden binaries to ISVs as a solution to test matrix complexity is a boondoggle), the DCC players are decent folks with a strong history of commitment to Debian-the-project. There's no need to hammer on the trust issues in public; better perhaps to focus scrutiny on the substance of their proposals to improve upon the Debian base. Cheers, - Michael (IANADD)
Re: Delegation for trademark negotiatons with the DCCA
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 01:59:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 03:07:07PM +0200, Peter Vandenabeele wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 02:38:38PM +0200, Peter Vandenabeele wrote: So a naming in the sense of Debian Commercial Support Association or something along those lines would seem to make it clearer to me ... or just stick to the original DCC as Debian Commercial Consortium. Isn't it entirely plausible to be doing Debian commercially without wanting to be involved in the DCC? Obviously. Very many are already doing that for years and most of them use to some degree the trademarked word Debian in their name or in their published marketing material. But as long as it was clear that this was an *external* (commercial or non-commercial) effort, I have not seen many complaints about that use of the Trade Marke Debian. I also don't think it is a problem, as long as those external entities behave decently and do not make express misrepresentation of the trademark. Isn't the DCC about standardising on some standard set of modified/updated packages for derivatives? More than just plausible, surely we expect a bunch of commercial types *not* to want to do this? Yes. In that case, those other commercial people would just have to figure yet another commercial/artistic name, going through the same pain in finding a good name as anybody else. The name space is large enough for anyone. As long as it is clear that they are an external (commercial or non-commercial) entity, I would expect no problem to implictely or explicitely granting many more groups derived rights to the trademark Debian. Only the wording core used in combination with the trademark Debian, implies to me a very specific relationship to the project. Peter (IANADD) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why Debian Common Core Alliance? Why not Debian?
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 11:17:28PM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote: [...] There's no need to hammer on the trust issues in public; I tend to think in public is the best place to hammer on trust issues; otherwise how to tell the difference between a convincing argument, or the appropriate people getting bored, threatened or bought off? Finding out which of those is the case seems pretty crucial to resolving trust issues, afaics. better perhaps to focus scrutiny on the substance of their proposals to improve upon the Debian base. I haven't seen any such proposals (beyond add LSB compliance and new X); I wouldn't really expect to either -- far easier and better to just make the improvements, license them freely, and put them out for use and comment simultaneously. Which is to say, create a fork. But maybe I've just missed them. Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Delegation for trademark negotiatons with the DCCA
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:28:11AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: But beyond that, yes, when there's something to report, I plan on making either -private or -project as appropriate aware of what is being done, just like any other delegate. Well, most other delegates tend to get distracted and not do reports :) Cc'ing discussions to -project or -private as they happen would seem a fair bit easier; and a lot more transparent and inspiring of trust. The concerns here are acknowledging Debian and not being misleading, and they're shared by everyone involved, no? Is there some reason either list is inappropriate for working out how to simultaneously address those concerns? Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You appear to have raised a valid point, in that we (the bulk of the DDs in the UK [1]) are intent upon [...] Where bulk is about 7 DDs out of 70+. Not only were other UK DDs not involved, but many of them probably haven't been told of this business being set up in their name. To that end, we've set up a society: http://wiki.earth.li/DebianUKSociety the primary purpose of which is to allow us to open a bank account to hold the mentioned funds. That disagrees with the stated primary purpose: The purpose of the society is to promote Debian and Free Software in general. That being the case, I (as the society's current chairman) would like to formally request a license to use the Debian trademark in the context of the Debian UK Society, and it's associated bank account. The in the context of the Debian UK Society bit seems very broad. I remind you of Phil's earlier words: To present it as a fait accomplis was bound to cause bad feeling [...] -- either way I don't see how we can trust them to be issuing statements which will be perceived by the world to have come from the project. and I ask you to apply his own judgement: We should clearly protect our users from the confusion that the [...] name is bound to cause by issuing a cease desist letter forthwith. Maybe that will cause Debian-UK to become a debian subproject and/or to become a narrower-purpose fundholding-only operation. Regards, -- MJR (slef) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Delegation for trademark negotiatons with the DCCA
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote: Well, most other delegates tend to get distracted and not do reports :) Indeed. I'd like to hear back from the FDL and CC delegates, for example. [...] The concerns here are acknowledging Debian and not being misleading, and they're shared by everyone involved, no? Is there some reason either list is inappropriate for working out how to simultaneously address those concerns? The problem with public mailing lists is that pride and confidentiality both chill some discussion, while unrelated flamers heat some up. Maybe they shouldn't, but they often do. Private lists have the disconnection and suspicion problems I think you're describing. Negotiations are difficult to do well. -- MJR/slef -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Delegation for trademark negotiatons with the DCCA
quote who=Peter Vandenabeele date=Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 03:07:07PM +0200 On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 02:38:38PM +0200, Peter Vandenabeele wrote: So a naming in the sense of Debian Commercial Support Association or something along those lines would seem to make it clearer to me ... or just stick to the original DCC as Debian Commercial Consortium. My problem with this name is that sounds primarily descriptive and implies exclusivity to me. Let's say that Ubuntu, Guadlinex and another distro want to create a new association for giving back to Debian. Wouldn't that also be a Debian Commercial Consortium? Why does Progeny and Co. get first dibs on the name? The DCC has a specific idea of what giving back to Debian in a commercially viable way means but it is by no means the only one and shouldn't encourage names that might lead people to believe that it is. I think that any license to use the Debian trademark should be not imply exclusivity. This is why SLX Debian Labs is such a better name than than Scandinavian Debian Labs or even Debian Foundation Norway (both ideas that were tossed around at one point). Debian Labs implies that someone works with Debian but are does not necessarily represent the entire project. Either of the other names above would also have implied that they were *the* lab for Norway or Scandinavia. In fact, we'd love to have *lots* of labs and no lab's name should imply otherwise. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mako.cc/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Delegation for trademark negotiatons with the DCCA
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] But beyond that, yes, when there's something to report, I plan on making either -private or -project as appropriate aware of what is being done, just like any other delegate. Please try to keep as much of it public as reasonable possible, I understand that ongoing negotiations are usually private. On the other hand, i feel that posts on -private should be limited to as few as reasonably possible, few things really need that security, save for things like security issues themselves. Even those can usually safely be made public after theyh have been dealt with. Perhaps occasional postings to -devel that sumarizes the decussions in -private that no longer had any good reason to be private, would be helpful to the project. Belive it or not, more people are interested in the projects wellbeing than the developers themselves. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Delegation for trademark negotiatons with the DCCA
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Anthony Towns wrote: On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:28:11AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: But beyond that, yes, when there's something to report, I plan on making either -private or -project as appropriate aware of what is being done, just like any other delegate. The concerns here are acknowledging Debian and not being misleading, and they're shared by everyone involved, no? Is there some reason either list is inappropriate for working out how to simultaneously address those concerns? The lists are appropriate for figuring out which solutions are acceptable to Debian, and indeed, the discussions here continue to be useful to that end. If a decision on my part ends up being actually required, I plan on bringing the alternatives here for discussion before actually making a decision. In either case, some parts of the discussion will remain private if I feel that is the proper method to resolve the situtation as amicably as possible. Don Armstrong -- It was said that life was cheap in Ankh-Morpork. This was, of course, completely wrong. Life was often very expensive; you could get death for free. -- Terry Pratchet _Pyramids_ p25 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
New Maintainers
This is a summary of the AM report for Week Ending 21 Aug 2005. 4 applicants became maintainers. Khalid Aziz khalid I have been using Linux for almost 6 years and been a Linux kernel developer for 4 years. I have a Bachelor of Engineering degree in Computer Science and Technology from Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India, and I have a Master's degree in Computer Science from Colorado State University. I have been working as a Software Engineer since 1991. My work in the last 13 years has been primarily in the area of kernel design and implementation. I started using open source software back in 1988 starting with gcc. I strongly believe in the principles of open source software. I became familar with Linux around 1998 and started using it at home. When HP started a Linux lab, I moved to this lab and was one of the early members of this lab. Today Linux is not just a hobby but my profession as well. I have contributed code to SCSI subsystem in Linux kernel. I am also the original author and maintainer of HCDP serial console driver in Linux kernel. I am also the author and upstream maintainer for prctl tool. I have participated actively in establishing standards for Linux features in a Telco environment. I am a founding member of OSDL Carrier Grade Linux Working Group http://www.osdl.org/lab_activities/carrier_grade_linux and was the first chairperson for Proof-of-Concept technical sub-committee. I intend to continue working on Linux even if my job description were to change. Where I feel I can make contribution to Debian is in ongoing maintenance of prctl package, providing kernel patches and associated userspace packages for additional functionality (for example evlog), helping test, troubleshoot and debug various other debian packages. An important part of my job is to put together Debian based solutions. Doing this exposes me to multiple debian packages which I then test as part of a solution. I am a strong believer in Open source principles and the Debian social contract is exactly in line with my own beliefs. I intend to keep as much of my work as possible in line with open source philosophy, and hence debian social contract as well. Since I use Debian on my desktop, laptop and server, I am very interested in keeping Debian not only free but highly functional as well. Robert Collins robertc I first encountered Free Software as a high school student playing around with BBS systems, and some graphics software (using DJGPP) on a (literal) i386. At university I downloaded a 0.96.something 26 disk install set, and tried out Linux for the first time. I kept an eye on Linux Free Software from that point on, using it for things like an internet gateway, and from time-to-time as a desktop. (It really didn't make a good desktop then). In the late 90's, I updated a port of Squid on Cygwin, and started interacting with the community in a much more significant way - eventually joining the core teams for Cygwin and Squid. Since then I've generated bugfixes (hopefully :}) useful bug reports to many other projects (including automake and libtool, which seems to scare some folk). My interested have altered slightly since... I now spend most of my 'spare' time in the GNU Arch Squid communities. I have become allergic to software whos innards I cannot see, and whos annoying behaviours I cannot fix. In a dovetailed process, I have come to run Debian GNU/Linux on all my machines (with one little exception, a wintendo for games, and maintaining the cygwin setup program). I currently spend considerable time in the debian community, on the debian-devel mailing list, IRC, and with the local Sydney SLUG's debian SIG. In addition to the package(soon to be packages) I maintain in debian, I try to help out by winnowing bugs on the software that I know well, by virtue of being an upstream for it :}. I intend to carry on doing this, and to expand these responsibilities as and where I can commit the time. Oh, I'm also active in other local free software groups like SLUG, openskills the ACS FOSS SIG. Clément Stenac zorglub I'm currently a 21 year old french engineering student in french Ecole Centrale Paris. I caught the computer virus when I was only 7 on an Atari ST and discovered programming. It was great, because it was very easy to start, you didn't have complex things to learn. Then I got a Windows PC and almost stopped programming, because it seemed too complex to me... I first learnt about Linux in 1998. I was extremely interested by this idea of free software. Being able to see the sources and even modify them seemed really great. I gave it a try (RedHat 5 or 6, don't remember exactly), but I was a little lazy, and got quite discouraged when difficulties arose. During several years, I kept using a little Linux (Mandrake), but still mainly Windows. When I arrived at Ecole
Please delete the page: : http://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/2005/03/msg00044.html
Mr. Webmaster, I´d like to request that this page:: http://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/2005/03/msg00044.html Be deleted from your discussion list. This is a portuguese website that promotes SPAM and software piracy and it is bringing problems to many people in Brazil. I am sure that your discussion list does not support Spam and piracy so I ask you to deleted it as soon as it´s possible. Thank you very much Marina Rodrigues -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fwd: Please delete the page: : http://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/2005/03/msg00044.html
Redirecting to the right place. Dear list archives team: maybe you could consider a footer which tells people how to deal with offensive content? E.g. where to turn to? - Forwarded message from Marina Ribeiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Marina Ribeiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-project@lists.debian.org Subject: Please delete the page: : http://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/2005/03/msg00044.html Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mr. Webmaster, I´d like to request that this page:: http://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/2005/03/msg00044.html Be deleted from your discussion list. This is a portuguese website that promotes SPAM and software piracy and it is bringing problems to many people in Brazil. I am sure that your discussion list does not support Spam and piracy so I ask you to deleted it as soon as it´s possible. Thank you very much Marina Rodrigues - End forwarded message - -- .''`. martin f. krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Invalid/expired PGP (sub)keys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver! the only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it. -- oscar wilde signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
Re: Please delete the page: : http://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/2005/03/msg00044.html
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Marina Ribeiro wrote: I´d like to request that this page:: http://lists.debian.org/debian-laptop/2005/03/msg00044.html Be deleted from your discussion list. This is a portuguese website that promotes SPAM and software piracy and it is bringing problems to many people in Brazil. I don't know about it being portuguese, and much less about it promoting software piracy, but I can confirm that the message Marina refers to is the usual SPAM offering a list of haversted email addresses. -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 11:03:38AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To that end, we've set up a society: http://wiki.earth.li/DebianUKSociety the primary purpose of which is to allow us to open a bank account to hold the mentioned funds. That disagrees with the stated primary purpose: The purpose of the society is to promote Debian and Free Software in general. Ooo! Look! Pedantry! How excitement! Phil tries to say the primary purpose of the act of setting up the society is to allow us to open a bank account, but MJ rather naturally interprets what he actually says as the primary purpose of the society is ... and finds clear evidence of unmitigated hypocrisy. Will they ever communicate successfully? Can the bonds of ambiguity be broken? Will pride lock our disputants into an escalating cycle of incoherence, or will love win through? Find out next week, right here on debian-project! Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
