Re: [Debconf-discuss] Your biggest achievement during past DebConfs (aka new DebConf promoting campaign)
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 18:38, Francesca Ciceri madame...@debian.org wrote: In this thread? :) And I think could be better to -project instead that debconf-discuss (I've just set reply-to accordingly). Or, if you prefer send me a private reply at madamezou@d.o During Debconf9 I gave a talk about our project. Then one of the developers present found it could be used to solve some of their problem at work. Soon his organization became one of the most active contributors in our community. (also, unrelated to me, just a suggestion for this campaign: it would be good to get a quote from Eben Moglen about his freedombox talk at Debconf10 and the impact it had, considering how the FreedomBox foundation is heavily debian-populated) Thanks, Guido -- 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/CAM4p=jphh0kt8djif_qesuh7cgwhuwsgowf1wihtt++bu23...@mail.gmail.com
Re: [Debconf-discuss] Your biggest achievement during past DebConfs (aka new DebConf promoting campaign)
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 18:38, Francesca Ciceri madame...@debian.org wrote: (also, unrelated to me, just a suggestion for this campaign: it would be good to get a quote from Eben Moglen about his freedombox talk at Debconf10 and the impact it had, considering how the FreedomBox foundation is heavily debian-populated) and may be also Mark S -- I believe U. was kinda conceived at debconf 2003 or so ;-) -- =--= Keep in touch www.onerussian.com Yaroslav Halchenko www.ohloh.net/accounts/yarikoptic -- 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/20120213153241.gn16...@onerussian.com
OSI affiliation
Dear project members,
as you might have heard post-FOSDEM, the Open Source Initiative (OSI)
is opening up to an affiliate membership structure [1,2]. As I've
already mentioned in [3], representatives of OSI have approached me to
know if Debian is interested into joining. I'd like to discuss with you
such a possibility.
[1] http://www.opensource.org/node/604
[2]
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Open-Source-Initiative-affiliates-announced-at-FOSDEM-1428905.html
[3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2011/12/msg0.html
For now, the only responsibility would be to have a Debian project
representative participate into OSI activities, as an advisor. Later on,
once the old style OSI board and the initial OSI affiliates have
finalized the governance structure, affiliate projects are expected to
have a say in OSI activities and decisions.
Although I'd like to hear your comments before deciding, my advice is to
accept the invitation and have Debian join OSI. My rationale for that is
twofold:
- OSI history is intertwined with ours and we share a common heritage:
the DFSG. Having the actors interested in such a document work more
closely together is, IMHO, desirable.
(As a side note on this: ours and OSI's version of DFSG have diverged
through the years. It'd be nice to see if we can merge the differences
and/or generalize the texts so that other distros and projects can
benefit from them.)
- OSI seems to have evolved quite a bit as of recently. After many years
of low activity, they have took part in important political battles
for Free Software. They have also done so side by side with other
organizations, including the FSF (see [4] for a recent example on
software patents). Those battles are important for Debian and their
outcomes will influence us, whether we like it or not. Unfortunately
we rarely have the energy, structure, or visibility to fight them.
Lacking those resources, joining an association who has them is a
useful way to contribute.
[4] http://www.fsf.org/news/osi-fsf-joint-position-cptn
Again, the above is just my personal advice. I'll be happy to read your
comments and use them to make a more informed decision.
Cheers.
PS just in case you care about that debate: I'm no fan of the expression
open source; I believe that user freedoms are here to stay, while
development methodologies are not. I consider that part of the OSI
name to be, essentially, historical heritage. I don't think it should
stop us from working with OSI, if we consider that doing so is a
useful thing to do
--
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
Re: OSI affiliation
On 02/13/2012 01:10 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: - OSI history is intertwined with ours and we share a common heritage: the DFSG. Having the actors interested in such a document work more closely together is, IMHO, desirable. (As a side note on this: ours and OSI's version of DFSG have diverged through the years. It'd be nice to see if we can merge the differences and/or generalize the texts so that other distros and projects can benefit from them.) - OSI seems to have evolved quite a bit as of recently. After many years of low activity, they have took part in important political battles for Free Software. They have also done so side by side with other organizations, including the FSF (see [4] for a recent example on software patents). Those battles are important for Debian and their outcomes will influence us, whether we like it or not. Unfortunately we rarely have the energy, structure, or visibility to fight them. Lacking those resources, joining an association who has them is a useful way to contribute. [4] http://www.fsf.org/news/osi-fsf-joint-position-cptn Again, the above is just my personal advice. I'll be happy to read your comments and use them to make a more informed decision. I found the same reasons in my head while reading the first part of your email. I truly believe Debian should be an OSI affiliate Regards. -- Jose Luis Rivas - GPG: 0x7C4DF50D / 0xCACAB118 The Debian Project Developer -- http://ghostbar.ath.cx Barquisimeto, Venezuela signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Your biggest achievement during past DebConfs (aka new DebConf promoting campaign)
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 10:32:41AM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: and may be also Mark S -- I believe U. was kinda conceived at debconf 2003 or so ;-) I can confirm that at DebConf03 in Oslo I have heard rumors about a company with no name intending to base a distribution with no name upon Debian. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- 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/20120213224448.gc14...@an3as.eu
DEP 5: last call before closing.
Le Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 03:14:28PM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit : Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes: Are there other blocking issues with this DEP ? If not, I will mark it accepted after two week-ends. I have some lingering concern that the spec isn't sufficiently clear and precise, and I know Steve was planning on writing up the issues that he saw from doing a comprehensive review for that. It seems like he's struggling to find time to do that, but I do think that's an important step, so I'm going to try to find time to do a comprehensive review of the current text the way that I'd review a Policy proposal or RFC and will send the issues that I come up with (if any). However, I think it's perfectly reasonable for me to do that within the time frame that you mention above, and I don't think the process should block on that work, so the deadline you propose sounds reasonable to me. Dear Russ, while you suggested that I go ahead without your review if it does not come by two week-ends, please let me know if you would like to extend that time. Otherwise, I will mark the DEP accepted this week. Note that as you are a Policy maintainer, you will have a second chance to review the specification before it is published on line. If you and others think that the DEP is not acceptable as it is, please raise your hand now, and explain the problem. If other people would like some time to make a comprehensive review, no problem, but I would like them to propose a reasonable timeline. To summarise, the nexts steps are: 1) Mark DEP 5 accepted. This ends this development cycle. 2) Finish its integration in the debian-policy package. Policy maintainers obviously have the final cut and can make adjustments if needed. 3) Upload debian-policy 3.9.3, which will place the specification at http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ 4) Add a disclaimer to http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/ that it is a historical document and point at the latest version on www.debian.org. 5) Send a message to debian-devel-announce. 6) Relax :) By the way, this is also the last call for people who think they should be mentionned in the Acknowledgements section. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- 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/20120214001948.gb9...@falafel.plessy.net
Re: Your biggest achievement during past DebConfs (aka new DebConf promoting campaign)
On Montag, 13. Februar 2012, Andreas Tille wrote: I can confirm that at DebConf03 in Oslo I have heard rumors about a company with no name intending to base a distribution with no name upon Debian. sure that wasn't DebConf4 which had a session with that very topic? -- 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/201202140116.06134.hol...@layer-acht.org
Re: Bug#658209: DEP 5: last call before closing.
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes: while you suggested that I go ahead without your review if it does not come by two week-ends, please let me know if you would like to extend that time. No, that's fine, don't wait for me. It will either happen by Friday or I think we should move forward anyway. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- 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/877gzqqmth@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: OSI affiliation
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 18:40 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: [...] Although I'd like to hear your comments before deciding, my advice is to accept the invitation and have Debian join OSI. [...] +1 -- Ben Hutchings Beware of programmers who carry screwdrivers. - Leonard Brandwein signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Your biggest achievement during past DebConfs (aka new DebConf promoting campaign)
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 01:16:05AM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: On Montag, 13. Februar 2012, Andreas Tille wrote: I can confirm that at DebConf03 in Oslo I have heard rumors about a company with no name intending to base a distribution with no name upon Debian. sure that wasn't DebConf4 which had a session with that very topic? Pretty sure because I was not attending DebConf4. I very clearly remember the discussion because it was originally about finding a new name for debian internal projects which turned out to become CDD. It happened when sitting on the stair of the entrance hall in the venue in Oslo. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- 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/20120214065832.ga23...@an3as.eu
