Re: DEP: 5 Machine-readable debian/copyright - License specifications - Link broken
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:53:05AM +0100, Steve Langasek wrote:
As the DEP is not yet in a state that it should be accepted, I don't think
it's appropriate to ask the Policy maintainers to tie the timeline of the
3.9.3.0 Policy release to the DEP bugfixing.
Fair enough.
Per my discussion with Lars, and as indicated in his previous mail, I will
continue to follow the DEP process on debian-project to get bugfixes applied
to DEP5 and will ask the policy maintainers to sync with the DEP when I am
satisfied that the language is correct. (Note that I have no intention of
driving any further changes to the *format*, but the existing *language* is
too ambiguous for something that's supposed to be a machine-readable
standard.)
I agree that the language could benefit from some more work. Thanks for
your work on that! Do you have any ETA for that language review to be
concluded? Or, alternatively, do you have any info to share on what
people willing to help with that should work on?
I ask because, as I've observed in [1], the current intermediate state
of DEP5 seems to be hindering its adoption, for reasons as silly as the
uncertainty about the versioned URL to use to reference the spec. If we
want to hope for a decent adoption rate of DEP5 in Wheezy — and I think
we should — either we finalize DEP5 ASAP or at least we try to smooth
some of its current rough edges.
For instance, considering you last (parenthesized) paragraph above: how
about fixing the versioned URL in the spec once and for all? If no
further changes to the *format* are planned, that should be a safe thing
to do.
Cheers.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/?m=20110905164020.ga...@upsilon.cc
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences .. http://upsilon.cc/zack .. . . o
Debian Project Leader... @zack on identi.ca ...o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Gnome3 :s
Hi. I was just wondering if Debian some day will switch to gnome 3 as default desktop. I beg you not to. Seeing all the other popular gnome distros changing to gnome 3 makes me really nervous that Debian is next. I really like the gnome 2 desktop and I wich you to keep supporting it as the default desktop environment. The new gnome 3 and also the unity desktop is not suited for desktop use. Sincerely A proud Debian user.
Re: Gnome3 :s
Hi, On 13/09/2011 14:45, Pontus Andersson wrote: I was just wondering if Debian some day will switch to gnome 3 as default desktop. I beg you not to. Seeing all the other popular gnome distros changing to gnome 3 makes me really nervous that Debian is next. I really like the gnome 2 desktop and I wich you to keep supporting it as the default desktop environment. The new gnome 3 and also the unity desktop is not suited for desktop use. Gnome Debian Maintainers already expressed their opinion on this specific question. You can read [1] and [2] to have an idea on their plan. They might be better references to cite out there, but can't find any other right now. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/06/msg00023.html [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/04/msg00023.html Kind regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e6f582...@dogguy.org
Re: Report from the debconf11 sponsoring/mentors BoF.
Hello, I would like to confirm that I am still interested in dedicating some of my time to write code for debexpo. Serafeim, thanks for CC-ing me. I am on debian-mentors list already. I will look at the code, and probably have some questions. Idea of developing metrics plugin for collecting statistics and informations about sponsors and packages for improving mentoring process is interesting for me. I will just need some time to see how debexpo works. If there is no final decision of metric implementation, I will certainly have some ideas... Best, Janos On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 17:17, Arno Töll deb...@toell.net wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Serafeim, (keeping your CCs:) On 11.09.2011 23:56, Serafeim Zanikolas wrote: I understand that there's two sides in this effort: debexpo plugins that produce additional info about certain package features, and a repository of sponsors' interests/preferences/requirements. Do I understand correctly that you implement both things within debexpo? Are DDs expected to enter their preferences via the debexpo web ui? Yes. Debexpo runs certain plugins on incoming packages. Among those several QA plugins, which for example run Lintian, or check bugs being closed by the upload. Have a look to any given package on mentors.d.n to get the idea. On the other hand there are concepts and ideas to extend the mentors platform by social network functionalities to bring together packages with sponsors. Aside of the mentioned metrics, I am referring in particular to Lucas' idea here [1][2]. As far as I know there are currently no concrete plans to work on that though. Regarding the sponsor metrics: Yes, I do expect Debian developer to file their preferences via Debexpo web UI. The third key concept of the mentoring process is the package review itself. That's the part which is currently done by email on the debian-mentors mailing list. As we mentioned in the report you are all invited to join the current discussion going on there, how to improve the situation by moving the discussion part to the BTS (or not). My idea instead was to maintain DDs' preferences via an ikiwiki instance (using something structured like yaml), and make the wiki data accessible to debexpo via a REST interface. At the end of the day, it's up to whoever will do the work, but it's wise to remember that geeks prefer their favourite text editor than a web browser. I am not particularly thrilled by that idea. If you want to implement that, feel free to do, but I don't see any real benefit here. Really, I think I don't expect too much from a Debian Developer if I want him/her to register once in Expo and fill out a form if there is some general interest to sponsor packages. That's about two minutes of work if you have no free text to add. Also you should take into account, that human editable semi-structured data is error prone and lacks validation. Anyhow, thanks for stepping up, and whatever your approach, please share any code you have with Janos and see whether/how you could work together. Its all in our Git repository [3]. As usual I appreciate any contribution and we certainly need more help and good ideas. [1] https://alioth.debian.org/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=313252group_id=100127atid=413115 [2] https://alioth.debian.org/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=313253group_id=100127atid=413115 [3] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=debexpo/debexpo.git - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJObiKbAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNtEb4P/jVwf0LNKPxDniFVyrJnAgZl syIEieOaprZ3W/j16IjCWes+FwyWQ2MxeVcZDP7XgETAo9N/WDNbeZA6hTMt7u9H UnAl3kavSwHIDUfviRSiXhntiRxf1JA/ZLYDk7dcgQRvGkiWDm6l3eopAPFraXMA Id4xVZjcX6cyozaADYZG525JWvJhj5NhhwwnIgrbWB+mU1u2+rd5LV2H+h2GBuhY l7Bv9NvZmpMlDHfeIVGqvLb6i5nr5L899D5TNgCfcu/wwsDyikXOmh2hewPk8hog RHoi8u8Sr1eD3/WYZtQ8tSwgQPwQd0MVgH0B4BOLVHatnf6QzjLpDlPgoRujUu7Y zpOKpp3CfLGv5qUYrue6t38SSXBohz4wtvp1xT1npTbtp5KsuoVyTxbmojXpBTAy PuMmIwb2yhFVKOP0SHBWAoLU4lEa/vgDt/NuDwuBJaZvgSvd/6c0yx9EF7xdmX+P KD5g3Hi1yjmRC9APoLJzwQtMe6bsKto13GOWegI0vMZdspyVjRfW41ZmFdfhx4E+ UDnVvZsSZH/wVsEXFL4MedimhHADZ5bWxU8BwD3o9AmGc34T6dPE5T4f6UTi5m4I iW/6W2UZyEX7a7TGgV09F3AZVwmJoP209H7MlII/mGVgYEOiqbZGUmyxRJ0raAcm vDIjw8caJAUp/9Um+g+S =HVHf -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAGp=0ymuWOpbseFQGSsrnAB=ra60g9lrvkeyfovx1rsrxhq...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Gnome3 :s
Le mardi 13 septembre 2011 à 15:18 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy a écrit : Gnome Debian Maintainers already expressed their opinion on this specific question. You can read [1] and [2] to have an idea on their plan. They might be better references to cite out there, but can't find any other right now. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/06/msg00023.html [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2011/04/msg00023.html I don’t have much to add. I’m using the fallback GNOME session daily; I’ve made it available as a specific session in GDM in the Debian packages. It’s awesome and fixes a lot of bugs that used to be in GNOME 2. (I think GNOME Shell is awesome too, BTW. I just don’t have the hardware to run it.) -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' `- signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Gnome3 :s
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote: (I think GNOME Shell is awesome too, BTW. I just don’t have the hardware to run it.) Hmmm, I think Debian should get you a new GPU that you can use for testing GNOME 3, especially if it is supported by the free drivers. I have tested GNOME 3 a couple of months ago with the nouveau drivers on a year old nVidia desktop GPU and was pleasantly surprised that it worked pretty well. There was one glitch with the menu turning white, but I guess that was a driver issue that may be fixed in the meantime. CCing the DPL, I think this fits under here: http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DPL/AskingForMoney#Suitable_Money_Requests -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6h66w8p9t4ctpm0duj_hpm_pv5nfberwl0wcdbnejb...@mail.gmail.com
