Re: Abusive language on Debian lists
On Sun, 11 Apr 2021, Sam Hartman wrote: > I think the blanket prohibition of profanity in the list code of > conduct is outdated and harmful. That's (as it states) a historical holdover: "some people receive the lists via packet radio, where swearing is illegal." I can't recall a case of listmaster@ actually enforcing the prohibition of profanity, and I'm unaware of anyone actually using packet radio for receiving listmail anymore. [If they are, I really hope it's encrypted.] -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com Vimes hated and despised the privileges of rank, but they had this to be said for them: At least they meant that you could hate and despise them in comfort. -- Terry Pratchett _The Fifth Elephant_ p111
Re: Standing behind GNOME Foundation against Rothschild Patent Imaging LLC?
On Sat, 28 Sep 2019, Chris Lamb wrote: > For those not yet aware, Rothschild Patent Imaging LLC has filed a > lawsuit against the GNOME Foundation on the grounds that their > "Shotwell" photo manager violates patent §9,936,086: > > > https://www.gnome.org/news/2019/09/gnome-foundation-facing-lawsuit-from-rothschild-patent-imaging/ > > If we can leave the legal merits of this specific case or of software > patents in general for another time and venue, can I seek agreement > that the Debian Project would publically stand with the GNOME > Foundation against this attack on a cherished sister project of ours > and, by extension, on free software in general? I concur, especially as Debian also distributes shotwell. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com "She decided what she wished to happen and then assumed that reality would bend to her wishes." [...] "Reality doesn't indulge wishes." -- Terry Goodkind _Phantom_ p133
Re: Conflict escalation and discipline
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Ian Jackson wrote: > 2. You are suggesting mediation. Yes. It has been my experience that many of the occasional flareups in Debian have at their root a failure of communication between one or more parties which has been escalated instead of mediated. > Mediation is certainly *one* part of what is needed, but also > *conciliation* and *arbitration*. I don't expect the adversarial process to resolve our occasional breakdowns in communication. At most it will produce winners and losers. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com 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
Re: Conflict escalation and discipline
On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Chris Lamb dijo [Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:12:26PM +0100]: > > I also am reluctant to speak for Ian (!) but I believe he is making > > the point that it is this very diversity of contact points that > > could be part of the problem. > > But that's my point: Do you want to solve that by adding... Yet > another contact point? Would it be OK if leader@ stayed the contact point, but leader@ had a pool of individuals who were willing to mediate in such a case? [Perhaps with secretary@ or the CTTE chair as the backup in case leader@ was involved?] Such individuals would have the ability and knowledge to involve the existing levers of power (TC, DAM, leader@, anti-harassment etc.) if escalation was required. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com [A] theory is falsifiable [(and therefore scientific) only] if the class of its potential falsifiers is not empty. -- Sir Karl Popper _The Logic of Scientific Discovery_ §21
Re: Appropriate escalation (or non-escalation) re rude emails
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017, Sam Hartman wrote: > 3) Similar to 2. I don't think you can take off any hats you do have > when sending such mails. If you have a role in our account, > antiharassment, conduct, listmaster, moderation, or other related > processes, you can't really ever give that up when talking to people > about conduct. People will hear, and to some large extent should hear > your message with the hat, even if you intend it without the hat. > > And so, I think you need to take the same level of responsibility and > care for anything unofficial that you would for something more > official, because it's subject to the same potential for abuse. Taking care and responsibility is appropriate (and I believe everyone in these difficult roles does so.) However, taking the same level of care and responsibility would necessitate running any message I send by all of the other team members before sending it.[1] That would mean I'll never point out sub-optimal behavior until it reaches a level which is bad enough that it's worth wasting everyone else's time to craft such a warning. [Usually after multiple complaints.] Instead, I just Cc: everyone else who is on the role so they know what I've said, and can act if there's abuse. 1: At least, when I want to speak with my listmaster@ or owner@ hat on, that's what I do. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you really want to test his character, give him power. -- Abraham Lincoln
Re: Let's Stop Getting Torn Apart by Disagreement: Concerns about the Technical Committee
On Sat, 28 Oct 2017, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > During posting in those endless mailing list threads back then and > then being moderated by listmasters… asking myself "why me? … and not > everyone else as well?" For the record, listmaster@ did not moderate you. I'm sorry if you felt that you were being unfairly maligned, but this was addressed previously: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20141201002812.gj25...@teltox.donarmstrong.com -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com "Old hypotheses never really die, they're like dormant volcanoes." -- John McPhee _Annals of the Former World_ p313
Re: Bug#856139: certspotter: long description advertises commercial service
On Mon, 07 Aug 2017, Dr. Bas Wijnen wrote: > Ah, that's good then! Still, I think its description has the same > problem as certspotter, namely that it recommends the use of a > non-free service. In Debian, I would prefer to see a recommendation > for the free alternative, while the non-free alternative may be > mentioned (or not, depending on what users need). An important counterpoint is that the long description helps with the discoverability of a package. Mentioning a famous non-free service helps users discover the package and also notice that there are free alternatives. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com A kiss was mysterious and powerful, fragile and invincible. Like any spark, a kiss might fizzle into nothing or consume an entire forest. [...] A kiss could change the entire world. -- Scott Westerfeld _The Killing of Worlds_ p336
Re: producing, distributing, storing Debian t-shirts
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > There is also a lot of demand for laptop stickers, which I haven't had > made yet, but am considering. I was hoping to go in with a group of people on some hexagonal laptop stickers, myself. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com A Bill of Rights that means what the majority wants it to mean is worthless. -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
Re: Learning from FreeBSD's mistakes
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Martín Ferrari wrote: > If somebody repeatedly is: > > * performing a substandard job that affects you directly or indirectly, > * ignoring team practices, or flat-out moving packages out of the team > to avoid team policies, > * performing uncoordinated uploads that break reverse dependencies, > * deciding that they don't like your git packaging style and overwriting it, > * when criticised argue that they don't have time for your complaints > because they do so much packaging work, etc. > > What do you do? Talk with them. If possible, meet face to face (schedule a sprint?) Maybe involve a neutral third party who is respected by both members to help mediate. Accept that sometimes people are going to have different metrics of what a "good job" is. Avoid calling their work "substandard", as that's a value judgement, and makes the disagreement adversarial. > This is much worse if said person and their packages are not in a > team. Then your only recourse is CTTE. We don't have social solutions > for these social problems. I think we're selling ourselves short; we have all of the social solutions,[1] but they're time consuming and hard to enact. 1: From internal communication, to mediation, to CTTE deciding maintenance, to expulsion. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com [A] theory is falsifiable [(and therefore scientific) only] if the class of its potential falsifiers is not empty. -- Sir Karl Popper _The Logic of Scientific Discovery_ §21
Re: contacting Debian is too easy to get wrong
On Tue, 21 Mar 2017, Paul Wise wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > > > Yes. This would be great. An online form, that anyone could use to ask a > > question would be nice. > > We already have places to ask questions but people don't know how to > find the right one. The service or web page I proposed would only be > about finding the right place to ask. Why don't we merge www.debian.org/support and www.debian.org/contact into a single, question oriented page, with more detail on subsequent pages. Something like: 1. I want to report a bug in Debian --> www.debian.org/Bugs/reporting 2. I need help installing and using Debian --> www.debian.org/support 3. I want to help Debian --> www.debian.org/devel/join 4. I'm a reporter and want to contact Debian --> pr...@debian.org 5. I'm unsure who to contact at Debian --> deb...@debian.org and allow any DD to be on the deb...@debian.org alias (or have a web form or whatever). -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly. -- Woody Allen
Re: Learning from FreeBSD's mistakes [and 1 more messages]
On Mon, 06 Feb 2017, Ian Jackson wrote: > This distributed approach has strengths (which Don points out) but it > also has weaknesses. Principally, it means that though we advertise a > single point of contact, that point of contact is mostly a go-between > and support function for forum-specific teams; The antiharassment team is the single publicly-advertised point of contact, and (in theory) knows which teams are responsible for all of the different communications channels and events. Many forums also advertise a forum-specific point of contact which can take action more rapidly. > and it also makes it somewhat harder for us to respond to problems > with span several communication channels or several events. The few cases where we have had an individual which has been harassing others which spanned multiple forums, at least listmaster@ and owner@ have been able to communicate fairly effectively and implement consequences fairly rapidly. Even if antiharassment@ was given the authority to establish consequences directly, it would still require action of the teams in question to enact those consequences. -- Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com Of course, there are cases where only a rare individual will have the vision to perceive a system which governs many people's lives; a system which had never before even been recognized as a system; then such people often devote their lives to convincing other people that the system really is there and that it aught to be exited from. -- Douglas R. Hofstadter _Gödel Escher Bach. Eternal Golden Braid_
Re: Learning from FreeBSD's mistakes
On Mon, 06 Feb 2017, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Paul Wise writes ("Re: Learning from FreeBSD's mistakes"):
> > https://wiki.debian.org/AntiHarassment
>
> I'm aware of this team.
>
> But they do not have any authority to take steps against harassers.
They don't have the authority to take steps unilaterally, but I'm not
aware of a case where harassment has occurred and the appropriate team
has not taken action upon recommendation by the antiharassment team.
Indeed, in at least the case of lists, IRC, and the BTS, action tends to
get taken well before the antiharassment team is contacted and/or
involved.
> What this means is that the antiharassment team cannot even issue a
> proper warning against a harasser. (A proper warning being one where
> consequences clearly follow if the warning is not heeded.)
I think the antiharassment team should involve the appropriate team
(organizer, owner@, listmaster@, DAM, etc.) in the drafting of a warning
so that the appropriate consequences can be taken.
The specific teams of a medium are the appropriate teams because they
have the technical experience and community involvement necessary to
enact consequences. [For example, the organizers of an event will know
the appropriate means of excluding someone from an event, or even if
that is possible.[1]]
Personally, I am very happy to work with the members of the
antiharassment team to make sure that any warning that needs to be
issued has appropriate consequences for any of the parts of Debian whose
governance I participate in.
1: For example, some venues may not allow prior restraint or have other
specific legal requirements which must be met to legally exclude
someone.
--
Don Armstrong https://www.donarmstrong.com
Miracles had become relative common-places since the advent of
entheogens; it now took very unusual circumstances to attract public
attention to sightings of supernatural entities. The latest miracle
had raised the ante on the supernatural: the Virgin Mary had
manifested herself to two children, a dog, and a Public Telepresence
Point.
-- Bruce Sterling, _Holy Fire_ p228
Re: cran2deb is back! Was: About the recent DD retirements
On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: On Fri, 23 Jan 2015, Don Armstrong wrote: Just to piggyback here, debian-r.debian.net has about 8.6k of these packages (bioc, cran, and omegahat). Just kudos, Dan, for reviving the deb2cran initiative! any plans for providing builds for jessie state of affairs? ;) I'd like to; I basically just need to sit down and upgrade sbuild and fixup dak so that things work properly. I'll stick it on my todo list, and hopefully get to it soonish. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com You know, said Arthur, it's at times like this, when I'm trapped in a Vogon airlock with a man from Betelgeuse, and about to die from asphyxiation in deep space that I really wish I'd listened to what my mother told me when I was young. Why, what did she tell you? I don't know, I didn't listen. –- Douglas Adams _The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy_ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150126160217.gy21...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: About the recent DD retirements
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015, Anthony Towns wrote: CRAN has about 6k (~250 in Debian), Just to piggyback here, debian-r.debian.net has about 8.6k of these packages (bioc, cran, and omegahat). Yes, I really think Debian should have 300k+ packages, including everything in all the language archives Handling this will probably require second-class packages, where we use automated tools to package the package, and hope for the best. In some ways, we're already starting to go that way,[1] but it would be nice to use all of Debian's infrastructure even for those second-class packages, too. 1: I mean, I've already done this myself for parts of CRAN. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com But if, after all, we are on the wrong track, what then? Only disappointed human hopes, nothing more. And even if we perish, what will it matter in the endless cycles of eternity? -- Fridtjof Nansen _Farthest North_ p152 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150123180308.gj21...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: About the recent DD retirements
On Sat, 24 Jan 2015, Anthony Towns wrote: Archive, mirrors, lintian, piuparts, other qa stuff, yep. Right. Promotion to testing [1], maybe? I think so; I know I personally would like to have a set of bits of R packages which didn't change on about the schedule of a stable release. BTS, I somewhat don't think so? Probably just a single pseudo-package for coordinating groups of automatically packaged packages; if someone really wants to file more than one or two bugs, then it's probably a sign that the package should become a fully-supported package. [Or the person filing bugs should get more involved and help promote it to becoming a real package.] NEW-esque license review seems impractical. Yeah; for debian-r, we assume that CRAN has the license listed correctly, and we just go from there. [Well, the awesome cran2deb stuff does it; I just modified it and built the results.] Probably also wants an additional db tracking what upstream commit/whatever was converted to which Debian-ised version. Right. [1] Oh, dude! I finally thought of a possible rename for britney: pro-test as in promotion to testing. Sounds good to me. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com You have many years to live--do things you will be proud to remember when you are old. -- Shinka proverb. (John Brunner _Stand On Zanzibar_ p413) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150124073130.gp21...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: draft alternative proposal: fix problem at the root
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014, Michael Gilbert wrote: Doesn't that require constitutional change? The current powers as written make the TC a decision-making body, not a mediation body. Not really, because it doesn't take any constitutional powers to try to mediate. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com [C]haos is found in greatest abundance wherever order is being sought. It always defeats order, because it is better organized. -- Terry Pratchett _Interesting Times_ p4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141204060218.ga4...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: How to add avatar image to BTS?
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014, Paul Wise wrote: libravatar already falls back on gravatar. I only have gravatar setup and bugs.d.o shows my gravatar. Ah, cool. I wasn't sure if that worked if you only asked for the MD5 from libravatar. Good to know. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com If you have the slightest bit of intellectual integrity you cannot support the government. -- anonymous -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141018231038.gl28...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: How to add avatar image to BTS?
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014, Andreas Tille wrote: I was desperately searching for the announcement how to add an avatar image to the bugs in BTS. It seems simply adding an image at www.libravatar.org is not sufficient. Any pointers? That should work unless your email address has configured a federated libravatar service, in which case you'll have to add it to whatever server you use to serve avatars from. perl -MLibravatar::URL -e 'print libravatar_url(email = q(andr...@an3as.eu),default=404)' is basically what the BTS does, so if that works, the BTS works. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com I've had so much good luck recently I was getting sated with it. It's like sugar, good luck. At first it's very sweet, but after a while you start to think: any more of this and I shall be sick. -- Adam Roberts _Yellow Blue Tibia_ p301 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141017155637.ga28...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: How to add avatar image to BTS?
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014, Andreas Tille wrote:
??? This statements opens more questions at my side than its answering.
What I did is creating a login at
https://www.libravatar.org/
Adding two e-mail addresses (ti...@debian.org and andr...@an3as.eu) and
attached an image to these.
Must be a bug at libravatar (or maybe the e-mail addresses haven't been
verified by round-trip yet?)
echo -n ti...@debian.org|md5sum -|awk '{print $1}'; et al. gives:
8a84f1b37ffab292a4b2cec1b76d6185
or
3cc5d4b213b5cf0606305927d12727ab
so when
http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/8a84f1b37ffab292a4b2cec1b76d6185
and
http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/3cc5d4b213b5cf0606305927d12727ab
work, then it'll just work.
I did not *configure* anything neither have I any idea what a
federated libravatar service might be and in how far I would need to
setup an extra server (since I assumed that www.libravatar.org
actually is the server providing the images.
We actually have a fully federated setup, so something as simple as what
Sune did will work:
http://pusling.com/blog/?p=274
BTW, I have also an image attached to my gmail address. Could this be
used as well?
Yep; we just do it based on e-mail address with libravatar as the
fallback in case you don't have a federated libravatar setup.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
There is no form of lead-poisoning which more rapidly and thoroughly
pervades the blood and bones and marrow than that which reaches the
young author through mental contact with type metal.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes (Tilton 1947 p67)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141017175207.gf28...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: How to add avatar image to BTS?
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014, Andreas Tille wrote: On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 10:52:07AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: We actually have a fully federated setup, so something as simple as what Sune did will work: http://pusling.com/blog/?p=274 In other words: All those people with proper avatars in BTS have setup some DNS record on one of their hosts and providing an image on one of their web servers (Jonas' hint seems to point to the same information). No, that's not correct. We use libravatar as the fallback for people who do not have a federated server set up. People *can* set up a federated server if they don't wish to let libravatar serve their icons or know their details, but they don't have to. this sounds like a waste of time just to add my image to some records in BTS. All you have to do is have a properly set up account on libravatar.org. If that's not working for you, it might be a bug in libravatar's setup, or you might not have verified the e-mail associated by responding to the e-mail they sent you. My address works, and it works because I'm using libravatar, not a federated server: $ perl -MLibravatar::URL -e 'print libravatar_url(email = q(d...@donarmstrong.com))' http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/ef9859f1f5a1fd6442a1ccf872ef display (GET $( perl -MLibravatar::URL -e 'print libravatar_url(email = q(d...@donarmstrong.com))')) Now, I suppose I could also fall farther back onto gravatar instead of just libravatar, but I just figured that setting up an account on libravatar was easy enough that I didn't need to bother. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. -- Robert Heinlein -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141017205556.gg28...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: CoC / procedural abuse
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, Mason Loring Bliss wrote: On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:08:11PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ean Schuessler wrote: Can we just generate that procmail file or at least the section in question? Not easily, no. It's difficult to imagine this presenting a problem. Procmail reads on-disk config on each invocation - it doesn't run as a daemon - and it's trivial to include additional rules files. Generating a file is trivial. Generating the correct file in the correct location so that it is included from the correct procmail file (but not the wrong procmail file!) is not trivial. We have lots of lists, and each list has lots of procmail. That's why the ideal approach does not involve generating procmail. Ean is discussing with listmaster@ to generate script(s) to implement such an interface. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com America was far better suited to be the World's Movie Star. The world's tequila-addled pro-league bowler. The world's acerbic bi-polar stand-up comedian. Anything but a somber and tedious nation of socially responsible centurions. -- Bruce Sterling, _Distraction_ p122 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2014095932.gi17...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: CoC / procedural abuse
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ean Schuessler wrote: Can we just generate that procmail file or at least the section in question? Not easily, no. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Do you need [...] [t]ools? Stuff? Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. [...] We have a protractor. -- Neal Stephenson _Anathem_ p320 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140920060811.gz8...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: CoC / procedural abuse
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014, Ean Schuessler wrote: Obviously the parties responsible for empowering me to do this are on this list because they would ban me if I called them mean names. Responsible parties, please let me know where to start reading the code for the existing ban process. There isn't any. You write procmail in the correct configuration file to add a ban. You remove procmail in the correct configuration file to remove the ban. If you're willing to commit to write an appropriate tool that can be called from within a procmail script to implement banning and unbanning on the based of a passed message, then I believe listmaster@ (or at least, I) would be willing to write up a specification for the software. x -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Sometimes I wish I could take back all my mistakes but then I think what if my mother could take back hers? -- a softer world #498 http://www.asofterworld.com/index.php?id=498 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140919232823.gx8...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: CoC / procedural abuse
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, Jonathan Dowland wrote: However it does presume some statute of limitation on ban length. Don's message earlier in this thread does not indicate any particular ban length in this particular case. It's not clear to me whether this is an indefinite ban, or one subject to review, and in the latter case, whether the ban period is deliberately non-disclosed (and I can see the reasoning for that too, if that's the case, but I don't know that it is). I personally don't have a problem removing bans once someone indicates that they understand why the ban was put in place, and that they are going to avoid that behavior in the future. I generally don't place specific time limits, because I don't believe in punitive action... and also because I'm lazy, and I don't want to promise that I will remember to remove a ban at a specific time without being prompted. The whole purpose of bans and warnings is to stop unwelcome behavior on Debian infrastructure. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com The computer allows you to make mistakes faster than any other invention, with the possible exception of handguns and tequila -- Mitch Ratcliffe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140918191355.gk8...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: CoC / procedural abuse
On Thu, 18 Sep 2014, Francesco Ariis wrote: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 12:13:55PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: I generally don't place specific time limits, because I don't believe in punitive action... I'd consider a ban without length limitation is way more punitive than, say, an x-weeks ban, both being more severe than a warning. The escalation (warning, temporary ban, perma-ban) is what I am used to in most forums/irc channels (and it works quite well). If I understand correctly, you're interpreting my lack of specific time limits as placing a permanent ban, which isn't what I mean. By not having time limits, there's no lower bound. The upper bound is when someone contacts listmaster@ and convinces a listmaster that they'll do better, and a listmaster agrees and removes the ban. The time to the upper bound is entirely dependent on the individual in question and their desire to be a contribution to Debian. Would you consider this sensible approach for Debian MLs? This is basically already what we do, but we sometimes jump straight to a ban if the behavior is problematic enough without mitigating factors. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com For those who understand, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not, none is possible. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140918203349.gq8...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: CoC / procedural abuse
On Mon, 08 Sep 2014, Jakub Wilk wrote: * Don Armstrong d...@debian.org, 2014-09-05, 10:04: If anything more than a warning occurs, it is announced on debian-private@, which enables Debian Developers to review the actions that listmaster@ has taken, and override them via GR. Let's be frank: GR is such a heavyweight process, that it's impractical for overriding small decisions like this one. This is by design; the people who make decisions in Debian are the people who do the work. The little cynic in me says the GR wouldn't happen even if majority of DDs thought this ban was unwarranted. Why waste your precious time fighting, so that a guy you've never heard before would have the right to deliver bad jokes? All it takes to start a GR is 5 DDs, and 15 DDs to meet quorum. If there aren't 5 DDs who are willing to make the DDs, and 15 DDs who are willing to vote, then it's unlikely that there was actually a majority. After all, for at least the listmaster team, there are already more than 5 DDs on the team... -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Them as can do has to do for them as can't. And someone has to speak up for them as have no voices. -- Grandma Aching in _The Wee Free Men_ by Terry Pratchett p227 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140908145932.ga21...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: CoC / procedural abuse
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014, Don Armstrong wrote: Mailing list bans are not done in public to avoid harming the reputation of the individuals banned. If the individual in question wants the ban to be disclosed publicly, they can email listmaster@, and we will do so. Zenaan Harkness requested that the details of his ban be made public. Because of the following messages, I have blocked the posting ability of Zenaan Harkness z...@freedbms.net to debian-project. http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/caosgnssq50orj-m8zp27by8jsey9pb-b3rsqetebwngfels...@mail.gmail.com http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/CAOsGNSQQM7+CqNo4GbYK373ZyBNpGGJVzfKKqaR=7j_igdm...@mail.gmail.com Because of http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/CAOsGNSQvW45v90Lz17wXt2Mtzj=4J9z1ox+2f6LArju=okk...@mail.gmail.com http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/caosgnsqw4mmno08fsaexhseaudz+tiu9kyzz65fuwqnitja...@mail.gmail.com I have extended this to all Debian mailing lists. 1. The first set of messages quoted contain a transparent analogy to male anatomy whose entire point is to offend, and contains no actual discussion related to the Code of Conduct or the discussion at issue. 2. The second set of messages indicates that the individual in question is primarily interested in trolling Debian and associated mailing lists. With regards to the ban procedure, complaints were made to listmaster@; I determined that the were serious enough to warrant a ban without prior warning. Other listmasters were queried, and there were no objections. The ban may be lifted by listmaster@ at some point in the future, or may be overridden by Debian Developers via GR. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com A Democracy lead by politicians and political parties, fails. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140908050147.gy21...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: CoC / procedural abuse
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014, Mason Loring Bliss wrote: Was there process involved with his expulsion, or did the person who told him he had been blocked acting alone? The process for temporary or permanent bans on Debian mailing lists is: 1) Someone makes a complaint to listmaster@ 2) A listmaster reviews the complaint, and either decides that a) the complaint is unwarranted b) warrants a warning c) warrants a ban. If the complaint warrants a ban or warning, the opinions of other listmasters is canvassed for a short period of time, and if there are no objections, the action proceeds. If anything more than a warning occurs, it is announced on debian-private@, which enables Debian Developers to review the actions that listmaster@ has taken, and override them via GR. Is there record of this action? Bans on Debian mailing lists are announced to debian-private, and this ban was announced there as well. I'll note that one of the things that dismayed [...] the most was that this action was taken in private, which is wholly at odds with what Debian is about. Mailing list bans are not done in public to avoid harming the reputation of the individuals banned. If the individual in question wants the ban to be disclosed publicly, they can email listmaster@, and we will do so. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Rule 6: If violence wasn't your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it. -- Howard Tayler _Schlock Mercenary_ March 13th, 2005 http://www.schlockmercenary.com/d/20050313.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140905170419.go21...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: [Debconf-discuss] Possible Two Color Debian Logo White Vinyl Sticker Group Buy
On Wed, 07 May 2014, Bdale Garbee wrote: Bdale Garbee bd...@gag.com writes: Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes: I think these are going to be closer to US$5-10 per for larger ones, but I'm interested in getting a few of them myself. I work with a US supplier of cut vinyl decals for the Altus Metrum logo, I'll ask him for a quote on plain swirls in a size or two. I got a *great* quote on 2, 3, and 4 inch height versions from my guy for cutting swirls in single-color vinyl. Do those sizes seem good? That seems good to me. Bonus if we can also get the i dot and debian text too. [Perhaps in black or white? Dunno.] -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Leukocyte... I am your father. -- R. Stevens http://www.dieselsweeties.com/archive.php?s=1546 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140507213014.gc13...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Possible Two Color Debian Logo White Vinyl Sticker Group Buy
I'm considering coordinating a group buy of two color, 54mm x 70mm white vinyl stickers with the Debian Open Logo[logo], and distributing them to other group purchasers at Debconf14. Minimum quantities of 2000 (US$250) are required from the printer which I've found,[printer] which comes to $0.125 per sticker. I'm personally willing to take 500 of them, but I'd like to have enough other parties to take the additional stickers. Please either reply or indicate on the wiki page[wiki] if you are interested with the quantity that you are interested in. I'm also willing to consider larger sizes, shapes, or different printers, too. [If you are not going to be at Debconf14, but are in the US and want enough stickers to justify my time (and your money) sending them to you, I'm willing to consider that too.] [logo]: https://www.debian.org/logos/openlogo-100.png [printer]: https://stickerguy.com/images/stickerguy_bulk-pricing.pdf [wiki]: https://wiki.debian.org/Merchandise/Stickers -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Three little words. (In order of importance.) █ █ ▌ ▞▀▖▌ ▌▛▀▘ █ ▌ ▌ ▌▝▞ ▛▀ you █ ▀▀▘▝▀ ▘ ▀▀▘ █ -- hugh macleod Three Words -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140506194017.ga18...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: Possible Two Color Debian Logo White Vinyl Sticker Group Buy
On Tue, 06 May 2014, Steve Langasek wrote: What would really be nice would be if someone would make another run of the shaped swirl vinyl stickers. I think I last saw these for sale back in ~2006, and I've gone through enough hardware since then that my current laptop is bare. :( Any chance of someone making some of these, rather than just the square white ones? You mean these ones, right? http://debian.ch/merchandise/ I think these are going to be closer to US$5-10 per for larger ones, but I'm interested in getting a few of them myself. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -- Frederick Douglass -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140506211840.gd18...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: State of the debian keyring
On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Paul Wise wrote: I didn't think the BTS cared about OpenPGP keys? We probably will eventually, but we only use[1] them now to help whitelist mail. 1: By which I mean that if a message seems to have a PGP signature, we think it's probably not spam; we currently don't even bother to check it. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Of course, there are cases where only a rare individual will have the vision to perceive a system which governs many people's lives; a system which had never before even been recognized as a system; then such people often devote their lives to convincing other people that the system really is there and that it aught to be exited from. -- Douglas R. Hofstadter _Gödel Escher Bach. Eternal Golden Braid_ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140225190806.gc10...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: GR proposal: code of conduct
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Ean Schuessler wrote: It is well understood that secret laws and secret courts are not a desirable feature for any government. I feel that the same should hold true for our community. The procedures leading up to a ban, the evidence collected, the criteria the evidence must meet and the persons making the final decision should all be public record. I reference the Social Contract mandate to not hide problems in support of this concept. The reason why listmaster@l.d.o and ow...@b.do do not disclose or discuss bans in public are because: 1) We wish to avoid negative connotations from someone being temporarily banned being attached to the person after they have rectified their behavior 2) In the case where some agent is clearly trolling or otherwise engaging in attention seeking behavior, posting publicly just adds additional indication of this behavior. That said, for owner@b.d.o, everything regarding a ban is sent to owner@b.d.o which is available to all DDs, and bans are announced to debian-priv...@lists.debian.org I hope many of you will agree that while the CoC may be a necessary feature for our community it should be governed in a transparent, policy-driven and unbiased manner with detailed record keeping and peer review. I don't believe too detailed of a procedure is going to be feasible without dramatically wasting listmaster@, owner@, IRC operators, and wiki admin's time. We certainly can publish bans on -private, and I'm OK with there being review after the fact if necessary, but I'm not personally going to waste my limited time with a burdensome bureaucratic procedure to actually put the ban in place in the first case. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com An elephant: A mouse built to government specifications. -- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p244 -- 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/20140212194355.gs5...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Debian SCALE 12x booth volunteers wanted [Los Angeles, CA Feb. 22-23]
Again this year I am organizing the Debian Booth at the Southern California Linux Expo (SCALE)[1]. The expo is on Saturday and Sunday, February 22nd and 23rd near LAX. As usual, I'd like to get a few volunteers to help out in the booth. If you can volunteer (even a few hours is OK!) please e-mail me, and I'll tell you the information you need to know. If you are unable to volunteer, but are going to be there anyway, stop by and say hi! 1: https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/blog/scale-12x -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com life's not a paragraph And death i think is no parenthesis -- e.e. cummings Four VII _is 5_ -- 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/2014011245.gn22...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Please send responses to BTS bans to ow...@bugs.debian.org, not debian-priv...@lists.debian.org
When individuals or e-mail addresses are banned from utilizing the BTS, these bans are published on debian-priv...@lists.debian.org. If you are a DD who has substantial questions or concerns regarding BTS bans, please send them to ow...@bugs.debian.org, not debian-priv...@lists.debian.org. On behalf of owner@, I promise to tell DDs who have concerns if the total number of people voicing concern is equal to or greater than K (currently 5). If you are concerned that owner@ is not properly notifying DDs, DDs can read all of ow...@bugs.debian.org on master.debian.org:/srv/mail-archives/archives/debian-bugs.debian.org-owner/ [That archive is newly created, so it'll have all mail from here on out.] -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me. -- Emo Philips. -- Please respect the privacy of this mailing list. Some posts may be declassified 3 years after posting as per http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002 Archive: file://master.debian.org/~debian/archive/debian-private/ To UNSUBSCRIBE, use the web form at http://db.debian.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/20131223020912.gi6...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: Revising the Code of Conduct
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 10:32 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: 6. You should avoid sending attachments; this generates a lot of unnecessary bandwidth on our listservers. Instead, put the file you would like to attach online somewhere and post a link. It may be worth clarifying that this applies only to the mailing lists, not the BTS. And in both cases, I'd really like to be able to support RFC2017+RFC1521 style mime external-body attachments. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if anything else actually supports them. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com What, now? Soon equates to good, later to worse, Uagen Zlepe, scholar. Therefore, immediacy. -- Iain M. Banks _Look to Windward_ p 213 -- 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/20130521234849.ge26...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: Dealing with ITS abuse
On Sat, 13 Apr 2013, Chris Knadle wrote: Are you saying that if someone communicates abusively in the BTS publicly, they _shouldn't_ be publicly confronted about that at all? The goal of any communication from owner@ regarding abuse isn't confrontation, but correction and resumption of communication. Two particular bug reports I was invovled in recently had repeated abusive communication in them with no consequences that I could see for the one communicating abusively. Why should there be consequences that you can see? Only in exceptional circumstances do we actually use the controls that we have, but when we do, only -private and the individual sanctioned are informed. Reporting individuals are informed that we have addressed their concerns, but not necessarily the manner in which it has been addressed. I'm /not/ asking to know who got a penalty flag (I don't need to know) -- but I and others /do/ have a need to know if those exist and what they are. The only reason I've been looking at past events was to /infer/ what penalties exist due to a lack of information. They exist. They are modified as necessary to fit a particular situation, and range from warnings to technical restrictions on communication to expulsion. Don Armstrong -- If I had a letter, sealed it in a locked vault and hid the vault somewhere in New York. Then told you to read the letter, thats not security, thats obscurity. If I made a letter, sealed it in a vault, gave you the blueprints of the vault, the combinations of 1000 other vaults, access to the best lock smiths in the world, then told you to read the letter, and you still can't, thats security. -- Bruce Schneier http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20130413173423.gh15...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: Dealing with ITS abuse
On Fri, 12 Apr 2013, Russ Allbery wrote: However, Debian doesn't have a habit (for all the psychological reasons I mention above) of creating a public wall of shame to record places where people have been given a penalty flag. I've personally been remiss in my goal of creating a Debian BTS wall of excellence to record awesome bug submitters and closers and general awesomeness every month. Don Armstrong -- I leave the show floor, but not before a pack of caffeinated Jolt gum is thrust at me by a hyperactive girl screaming, Chew more! Do more! The American will to consume more and produce more personified in a stick of gum. I grab it. -- Chad Dickerson http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20130412184805.gi4...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: Poor BTS interactions (Re: [all candidates] Removing or limiting DD rights?)
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013, Moray Allan wrote: On 2013-03-28 16:35, Don Armstrong wrote: ow...@bugs.debian.org is an appropriate place to report abusive behavior by anyone (maintainers, users, etc) on the BTS. But how broad a definition of abusive behaviour are you taking here? I would have thought of contacting ow...@bugs.debian.org in respect of, say, two people battling about a bug's status in control messages, but I wouldn't have assumed that you would want to deal with, e.g., unnecessarily dismissive responses to user feature requests, or maintainers who sound ruder than they intend to users who report a bug due to not having read the documentation. I'd certainly prefer for people to communicate their concerns directly to the person who they feel is acting inappropriately, but it's always ok to ask for ow...@bugs.debian.org's assistance if they are concerned about their ability to do so directly or effectively. If new bug reporters have followed our instructions and used a tool to report the bug, they won't necessarily look at the website at all. If we want to be sure of reaching them with this kind of advice, it probably has to come by email as well (at least as a clearly labelled URL). Perhaps this is something that I should link to from the new bug submission response. Don Armstrong -- We want 6. 6 is the 1. -- The Prisoner (2009 Miniseries) _Checkmate_ http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20130401210204.gb4...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: [all candidates] Removing or limiting DD rights?
This message appears to be more appropriate for -project, non-candidate responses, please follow up there. On Thu, 28 Mar 2013, Chris Knadle wrote: As a bug reporter dealing with a misbehaving maintainer, this is what I would want: 1. A clear place to report the misbehavior ow...@bugs.debian.org is an appropriate place to report abusive behavior by anyone (maintainers, users, etc) on the BTS. Likewise, listmas...@lists.debian.org is an appropriate place to report abusive behavior by anyone in messages to lists. This probably should be better documented somewhere on the website, but as I've never had to look for it, I don't know where that would be. Someone who has searched for it and failed may have some better suggestions. 2. A set of guidelines maintainers should follow I certainly wouldn't have a problem with adopting a set of guidelines for interactions on the BTS, but I'd prefer to have these guidelines discussed on -project first. [We already do have guidelines for the mailing list, too.] 3. A public dialog about the misbehavior with some Debian authority along with the misbehaving maintainer. Note on (3): In the cases I've dealt with, the misbehavior was in public bug reports, so the discussion of the misbehavior should likewise be public. Discussion of misbehavior is usually not public. If someone reports bad behavior, owner@ or listmaster@ typically talks to the individual concerned, and warns them about it specifically, and informs the reporter that their concern has been addressed. In the case where owner@ or listmaster@ have made a decision which can be overridden by GR (IE, banning someone from using control@ or similar), -private is notified so DDs are aware. Don Armstrong -- S: Make me a sandwich B: What? Make it yourself. S: sudo make me a sandwich B: Okay. -- xkcd http://xkcd.com/c149.html http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20130328223540.gq5...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: gravatar on bugs.debian.org - acceptable or not?
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013, Holger Levsen wrote: That said, I do like the idea to display peoples pictures in the BTS, I just don't like that avatars are randomly made up when those pics don't exist and I'd prefer if those pictures could _also_ be fetched from some debian.org/debian.net ressource, just like the hackergotchis on planet, maybe even just using those. I don't have a problem using hackergotchis when those exist, it's just that writing code to use hackergotchis and keep them in sync with planet.d.o is far more complicated than the 10 line patch to use libravatar. But I'll probably get around to doing that eventually. The main reason that I don't want to use hackergotchis exclusively is because that's limited to people who are in planet, and I wanted contributors and bug submitters to Debian to be on the same footing as Developers. Finally, if someone wants an option to disable avatars in the bugreport view, I'd certainly add a patch which did that, or consider implementing it myself if an appropriate wishlist bug was filed with enough support against the debbugs package. [Bonus points if someone wrote a patch to also handle setting this option with a cookie or similar so people who didn't want to see avatars never had to see them again.] Don Armstrong -- Where am I? THE VILLAGE. What do you want? INFORMATION. Which side are you on? THAT WOULD BE TELLING. WE WANT INFORMATION. INFORMATION. INFORMATION. You won't get it! BY HOOK OR BY CROOK, WE WILL. Who are you? THE NEW NUMBER 2. Who is Number 1? YOU ARE NUMBER 6. I am not a number! I am a free man! HAHAHAHAHAHA. -- Patrick McGoohan as Number 6 with Number 2 in The Prisoner http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20130315192803.gj6...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: Inbound trademark policy, round 3
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013, Uoti Urpala wrote: Ian Jackson wrote: 1. DFSG principles should apply. IMO taking this as a starting point is completely wrong. DFSG guarantees that incompetent and malicious people may freely modify the software. For trademarks to have any meaning at all, distributing those modified versions under the original trademark must not be allowed. This problem and the compromise which allows escape from it is already present in the DFSG. (Require renaming upon modification.) We must start from the principles in the DFSG. If we decide that specific principles in the DFSG need to be altered to account for the realities and/or necessities of trademark(s), we should examine those differences and then alter the DFSG accordingly. While I can see the rationale for wishing to avoid Debian-specific licenses, I doubt adding such a restriction would ultimately be beneficial. The reason why this restriction is beneficial is because it allows the hundreds of distributions which are based on Debian to modify software, etc. [But feel free to argue that this benefit is not worth the cost to Debian in rebranding affected software.] Don Armstrong -- CNN/Reuters: News reports have filtered out early this morning that US forces have swooped on an Iraqi Primary School and detained 6th Grade teacher Mohammed Al-Hazar. Sources indicate that, when arrested, Al-Hazar was in possession of a ruler, a protractor, a set square and a calculator. US President George W Bush argued that this was clear and overwhelming evidence that Iraq indeed possessed weapons of math instruction. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20130109190202.ga26...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: i have a two tower server.
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, Kirill Shilov wrote: i have a two home based tower servers on fx8120/fx8150 proccessors, 16 and 32Gb Ram, and RAID6 15Tb storage. 100/100 internet channel. I can help Debian is and give access to resources for other maintainer. or tell me the project that needs a maintainer. http://www.debian.org/misc/hardware_wanted and hardware-donati...@debian.org are the best place to ask if someone in Debian could use or needs access to such a machine. Don Armstrong -- There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Jeremy S. Anderson http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20121121071246.gd5...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Visible results from sponsor funds [Re: Finding sponsors for Debian]
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Arno Töll wrote: Actually, $boss asked me the other day how to support Debian better as he wasn't very convinced about usefulness of money donations to Debian as he didn't get much feedback about that, other than a tax deductable receipt. It would probably be useful to have a single location in the w.d.o hierarchy which listed recent money expenditures by the project, with links to announcements and blog posts or similar. [And in the case of hardware, pictures of the hardware or similar.] (Maybe one already exists and I don't know about it?) Cc:'ing to -www for comment. Don Armstrong -- He was wrong. Nature abhors dimensional abnormalities, and seals them neatly away so that they don't upset people. Nature, in fact, abhors a lot of things, including vacuums, ships called the Marie Celeste, and the chuck keys for electric drills. -- Terry Pratchet _Pyramids_ p166 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20120312220434.gv9...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Volunteers for Debian Booth at Scale 10x in Los Angeles, CA, January 21 and 22, 2012
I am once again organizing a Debian Booth at Scale 10x in LA, CA,[1] and as always am looking for volunteers to help staff the booth. Also, if you wish to provide demo(s) appropriate for the booth, please let me know. If you are available and wish to help, please send e-mail to me with your availability, and I will respond with registration instructions. Don Armstrong 1: http://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale10x -- Sentenced to two years hard labor (for sodomy), Oscar Wilde stood handcuffed in driving rain waiting for transport to prison. If this is the way Queen Victoria treats her prisoners, he remarked, she doesn't deserve to have any. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20120103234901.gm21...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: Scientific article on Debian in PNAS
On Fri, 02 Dec 2011, Matthew Vernon wrote: Michael Hanke m...@debian.org writes: not sure if it has been mentioned somewhere already, but the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (aka PNAS) has a paper on the evolution of software in Debian. http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/11/14/1115960108.abstract Unfortunately not open-access, but arxiv.org has the PDF It's particularly bad given you can opt to make PNAS articles open-access. PNAS articles can be made open-access by paying USD $975 if you have a site license, or USD $1300 if you don't.[1] For at least my lab, this is enough money that it's not worth doing. [Instead, I tend to make a pre press version available, or otherwise make the research available to anyone who contacts me about one of my papers which they cannot easily get.] Don Armstrong 1: http://www.pnas.org/site/subscriptions/open-access.shtml -- No amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free [...] You can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him. -- Robert Heinlein _Revolt in 2010_ p54 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20111206002549.gc3...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: private email aliases considered harmful (Re: bits from the DPL for September 2011)
On Tue, 08 Nov 2011, Filipus Klutiero wrote: I had several problems with the BTS a few years ago. The main contact point for the BTS being a private email alias, Just as a side note, anyone who can log into a Debian machine and who actually wants to read the mail to ow...@bugs.debian.org can do so by logging into busoni.debian.org, and reading /srv/bugs.debian.org/mail/owner/owner*. We have archives of all mail since some time in 2002 there. Don Armstrong -- [T]he question of whether Machines Can Think, [...] is about as relevant as the question of whether Submarines Can Swim. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra The threats to computing science http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/2008183417.gn19...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: #debian unavailable on Mibbit
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, Leonardo wrote: I hope this is the right address to send this remark; I've been unable to find another else. The #debian IRC channel is unavailable on the web-based chat client Mibbit, http://www.mibbit.com. Each time I try to connect, I receive a message saying I'm banned. #debian on FN (and OFTC, iirc) do not let in clients from mibbit.com and similar web-based IRC clients because of abuse from these sites. We will usually add ban exceptions to registered nicks from these sites when requested. Contact an #debian operator for more details. Don Armstrong -- I don't care how poor and inefficient a little country is; they like to run their own business. I know men that would make my wife a better husband than I am; but, darn it, I'm not going to give her to 'em. -- The Best of Will Rogers http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20110615205044.gl4...@rzlab.ucr.edu
SCALE 9x (Southern California Linux Expo) Debian Booth
I'm organizing the Debian Booth at SCALE 9x (for some rather small values of organize.) If you are planning on attending SCALE, and can help me staff the booth for any amount of time, please let me know so I can make sure you get registered. If you are attending SCALE and want to meet up or sign keys or whatever, let me know too (or just come by; we're in Booth #16). Don Armstrong -- They say when you embark on a journey of revenge dig two graves. They underestimate me. -- a softer world #560 http://www.asofterworld.com/index.php?id=560 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20110221061225.gl5...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: No general political content on Planet
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010, Florian Weimer wrote: Could we please make and enforce a rule that no general political content is published on planet.debian.org and similar sites? Occasional political commentary is perfectly ok; if someone is going to be putting lots of it in their blog that wouldn't be of interest, they should be asked to consider separating feeds so only posts which would be of general interest to DDs is posted. I don't think we want to deal with the resulting toxic debates. Considering how rarely people mention politics now, it's not worth worrying about. Don Armstrong -- Il semble que la perfection soit atteinte non quand il n'y a plus rien a ajouter, mais quand il n'y a plus rien a retrancher. (Perfection is apparently not achieved when nothing more can be added, but when nothing else can be removed.) -- Antoine de Saint-Exupe'ry, Terres des Hommes http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20101104201519.gs16...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: Call for Votes - GR: Debian project members
On Mon, 04 Oct 2010, Roland Stigge wrote: I just got the ballot, but I'm not sure how to vote because we already have non-packaging developers as DDs (find examples in db.debian.org). http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2010/09/msg4.html and http://www.debian.org/vote/2010/vote_002 Don Armstrong -- After the first battle of Sto Lat, I formulated a policy which has stood me in good stead in other battles. It is this: if an enemy has an impregnable stronghold, see he stays there. -- Terry Pratchett _Jingo_ p265 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20101004203826.gs3...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
On Sat, 25 Sep 2010, Paul Wise wrote: On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Don Armstrong d...@debian.org wrote: Almost invariably, web-based chats like this that are launched without coordination with the network that they are talking to lead to abuse and the eventually banning and/or k-lining of involved hosts. #debian routinely bans the webchat on freenode, and I've no doubt that we'll be routinely banning other web chats which are used without authentication. Do the freenode webchat users not get assigned the IP address of the user connecting to the web server rather than the IP address of the webserver itself? IIRC for the Indymedia webchat we implemented the former. They get an encoding of the IP which is constant if the official webchat interface is being used. Unfortunately, people tend to use them (and tor) as a mechanism to hide their identity so that they can be a nuisance, and it means that any time we ban someone by IP, we later have to come back and ban their encoded IP on the webchat, etc. My real concern is for uncoordinated webchats, though. We try to keep coordinated ones unbanned in #debian, but if a problem comes from them, we tend to err on silencing them instead. Don Armstrong -- It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -- Frederick Douglass http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100927210936.gm22...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Valessio S Brito wrote: How can we devise problems and find solutions, without doing an experiment? Freenode already has one, which can be used. If people want one for OFTC[1] they should work with OFTC to create one. I believe that a web interface facilitates and increases participation. Example in DebConf10 when he was in the WebChat http://debianart.org/live (cgiirc on OFTC) Consider yourself volunteered! I'm not against it, I'm just pointing out problems that may not have been foreseen so whoever steps up to do the work can avoid those pitfalls. Don Armstrong 1: There may already be one in existence; I didn't find it with a few minutes of searching, though. -- It was a very familiar voice. [...] It was a voice you could have used to open a bottle of whine. -- Terry Pratchett _The Last Continent_ p270 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100928043619.gw6...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010, Valessio S Brito wrote: There is cgiirc, I think it quite functional. Example run: http://webchat.freenode.net/ Could anyone help with configuration and installation? Almost invariably, web-based chats like this that are launched without coordination with the network that they are talking to lead to abuse and the eventually banning and/or k-lining of involved hosts. #debian routinely bans the webchat on freenode, and I've no doubt that we'll be routinely banning other web chats which are used without authentication. Don Armstrong -- There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Jeremy S. Anderson http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100823192807.gf17...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: DEP-5: general file syntax
On Wed, 18 Aug 2010, Lars Wirzenius wrote: If the e-mail is just a clarification to the license and does not modify it, then I guess License is not the right place. Rather than munge it into Comment, I guess we need a new field. However, how often do these things happen? If it is very rarely, we could just live with appending them to License. In this case, I suspect that you have a change to the License (it's really LGPL) and you have an e-mail as evidence. So something like: File: * Licence: LGPL Evidence: From: Upstream Author aut...@upstream.example.com Message-Id: loof.li...@upstream.example.com Date: Mon, Apr 01 2010 04:01:00 +0401 Subject: License clarification . When I say GPL I actually mean LGPL, sorry about that. may be an option. [I'm thinking that in the normal case, Evidence would be assumed to be headers in the files themselves or a COPYING, COPYRIGHT, LICENSE, or similar file in the source repository, so you wouldn't include it.] It may also be important to be able to later verify PGP signatures or similar, so perhaps some simple transform to e-mail messages would be acceptable? Maybe something like: s/^(\.+)$/.$1/; s/^$/.//; s/^/ /; with the obvious reversal of: s/^ //; s/^\.(\.*)$/$1/; with non-important header removal allowed. (We probably only need From, Message-Id, Date, Subject, Content-Type?) Don Armstrong -- Do not handicap your children by making their lives easy. -- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p251 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100818054628.gt17...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: DEP-5 meta: New co-driver; current issues
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Lars Wirzenius wrote: The current outstanding issues I am aware of: [...] If there's more issues, please raise them. It would also be nice to take a hard look at the SPDX format,[1] adopt any good ideas from it, and try to make sure that the resultant DEP-5 can be translated into SPDX, and vice versa. [There's no reason for us to do all of the hard work of copyright and license auditing and verification when we can colaborate with the work of others.] From a few conversations I had at DebConf with Kate Stewart, my understanding is that parts of SPDX were based off of DEP-5, so this should be possible. (It's at least worth looking at.) Don Armstrong 1: http://spdx.org/spec/current -- I'd never hurt another living thing. But if I did... It would be you. -- Chris Bishop http://www.chrisbishop.com/her/archives/her69.html http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100812173239.gh17...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: DEP-5 meta: New co-driver; current issues
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Craig Small wrote: On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 01:27:12AM +1200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: More importantly, making debian/copyright be machine parseable provides some immediate benefits, without having to wait for a solution to the big, difficult problem. What are these benefits? The major important bits are that people who are basing distributions on Debian or are using Debian in the enterprise or embedded environments can more easily determine the set of licences that they need to audit for compliance purposes and due dilligence. Debian will also know better what licences we are distributing in main, and can possibly track issues where we are unable to ship specific derivative works. If we work with SPDX, we'll also be able to share the effort of producing these files with other distributions and our downstreams. We can also utilize Fossology and some of the other tools to also generate the copyright files and keep them updated with new releases, eventually reducing the maintainer burden of dealing with manually produced copyright files even further. I hope eventually that you'll be able to just run a tool on a source package, get a debian/copyright out of it, and maybe look at a few files which are questionable, then have it be kept automatically updated. If we're even luckier, upstreams will create the SPDX files themselves, and we'll just use them to generate the copyright files. DEP-5 itself has already been useful in seeding the creation of SPDX. Don Armstrong -- Your village called. They want their idiot back. -- xkcd http://xkcd.com/c23.html http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100813001011.gy31...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: buildd/porter/maintainer roles again
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010, Wouter Verhelst wrote: I can mail to the debian-powerpc mailinglist of course, but that seems to be mostly a powerpc user support list these days. Since coordinating porters and keeping them coordinated seems to be a problem, and pseudopackages with affects and/or reassign as appropriate seem to be the best solution, are there any objections to requiring a porter psuedopackage for each architecture and setting the maintainer of that pseudopackage to the appropriate mechanism to contact porters? I'm imagining that buildd admins would then just file an FTBFS against the package, the maintainer would see it, and say I don't know why this is failing; looks to be arch-specific, reassign or affects the bug to the arch specific porter psuedopackage, and the porters now can track the bug. If there aren't any objections here, I'll run this by the porters that I can track down. Don Armstrong -- What I can't stand is the feeling that my brain is leaving me for someone more interesting. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100727154214.gi19...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: buildd/porter/maintainer roles again
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010, Wouter Verhelst wrote: So that would mean they'd almost always need to be assigned to both the pseudopackage and the original package, which I frankly find to be a bit of a hassle. That's why affects exists. Additionally, tags have the interesting feature that you can limit a query by whether or not something is tagged in a specific way. Give me all packages that affect powerpc or s390, but not any other architecture could be an interesting way to hunt for bugs related to char signedness, which is going to be awkward using pseudopackages. You can do the same thing using packages; there's no difference in the way that packages are searched that differentiates them from tags. The major difference between tags and pseudopackages is that mail going to a psuedopackage's maintainer works today. Mail regarding bugs containing a specific tag does not currently go anywhere, and this would have to be changed. I can change this (and in fact, generalizing this is on my todo list), but I want to avoid spending time on a solution which won't be used. Pseudopackages also have the advantage that bugs regarding buildds and such which are in the porters domain can also be assigned to a specific psuedopackage so the porters can track it. Don Armstrong -- Only one creature could have duplicated the expressions on their faces, and that would be a pigeon who has heard not only that Lord Nelson has got down off his column but has also been seen buying a 12-bore repeater and a box of cartridges. -- Terry Pratchet _Mort_ http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100727174803.gk19...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: buildd/porter/maintainer roles again
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Hector Oron wrote: 2010/7/13, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org: But if those steps fail and it gets to the point where I'm actively asking for help, my customary experience has been to never get any reply. Mail seems to just disappear into a black hole. Sometimes this is true even for a requeue request, although mostly those do get handled, but anything asking for more details seems to rarely get any reply. We are persons, and mail stack grows fast. So, suggested use of BTS should be encouraged. Tagging packages for porters to have a look might be a really good idea. If porters would like psuedopackages for their architecture to track requests, that can be arranged. [Y'all just need to ask, point me at some bugs which should be assigned to them, tell me the maintainer address, and provide the blurb that goes on http://www.debian.org/Bugs/pseudo-packages.] Don Armstrong -- Judge if you want. We are all going to die. I intend to deserve it. -- a softer world #421 http://www.asofterworld.com/index.php?id=421 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100713212742.gt31...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: buildd/porter/maintainer roles again
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Aurelien Jarno wrote: On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 02:27:42PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: If porters would like psuedopackages for their architecture to track requests, that can be arranged. [Y'all just need to ask, point me at some bugs which should be assigned to them, tell me the maintainer address, and provide the blurb that goes on http://www.debian.org/Bugs/pseudo-packages.] While I agree it should go through the BTS, I am not sure pseudo-packages are the best for that. In most cases fixing a porting issue is not the responsibility of the maintainer nor the porter, but both together. With pseudo-packages it will end-up as bugs reassigned to the pseudo-packages (to the porters), with the maintainers being satisfied of having one bug less to care. You can reassign bugs to multiple packages or use affects to indicate that a bug affects multiple packages, so this isn't really a problem. That said, whatever way porters want to keep track of bugs which maintainers need assistance with is fine by me. It's even fine if different architectures choose different methods. Don Armstrong -- Of course Pacman didn't influence us as kids. If it did, we'd be running around in darkened rooms, popping pills and listening to repetitive music. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100713215003.gw31...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: buildd/porter/maintainer roles again
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010, Aurelien Jarno wrote: What we really need here is the push method. There's nothing stoping porters from pulling the status of bugs which need to be handled by the porters and forwarding them to their mailing list; since the maintainer of the psuedopackage would presumably be set to the porters mailing list, messages to those bugs would arrive there too. While what your offer probably answers to this problem, I would be more happy with something based on tags as it is already for the security bugs. OTOH I don't know about the internals and haven't thought in details about the advantages and drawbacks of each method. I would already be happy with pseudo packages. It's possible to provide another tag specific mailing list, but this requires code changes. It honestly doesn't make a difference to me which is done; psuedopackages would just be slightly faster to roll out and more obvious. I think on the contrary that we should have the same and easy method on all architectures, so that we can have this method recorded somewhere for package maintainers. If we have different and complex methods (like we already have with a few user tags for some architecture), people never apply them. Whatever mechanism is used, porters have to be happy with it, and have to use it. If having porters happy and using it means different mechanisms, that's fine. A single one would be optimal, but only if there's enough agreement behind it. The workflow should look something like this: 1) message goes to porter mailing list: [This bug #nnn looks like a arch-specific bug] 2) porters reassign/tag the bug to indicate that they've seen it, and agree that it is an arch-specific bug Don Armstrong -- I never until now realized that the primary job of any emoticon is to say excuse me, that didn't make any sense. ;-P -- Cory Doctorow http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100713235806.gz31...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: Problems with NM Front Desk
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010, Frans Pop wrote: Is it actually OK for FD to demand that candidates go through DM before applying for DD, or as part of the NM process? If the FD isn't fairly confident that someone has enough experience in Debian to make occupying an AM's time and taking slotes and time away from more qualified candidates, then yes, they should be strongly suggesting that people aren't ready to become DDs, and thus should spend more time working on Debian, possibly as DMs. 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 debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100706202512.gd27...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: Problems with NM Front Desk
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010, Frans Pop wrote: On Tuesday 06 July 2010, Don Armstrong wrote: On Tue, 06 Jul 2010, Frans Pop wrote: Is it actually OK for FD to demand that candidates go through DM before applying for DD, or as part of the NM process? If the FD isn't fairly confident that someone has enough experience in Debian to make occupying an AM's time and taking slotes and time away from more qualified candidates, then yes, they should be strongly suggesting that people aren't ready to become DDs, and thus should spend more time working on Debian, possibly as DMs. Strongly suggesting (or advising) is different though than requiring or demanding. The FD can say that someone isn't ready to enter the NM process, though, and then provide specific suggestions as to how they can demonstrate to the FD that they are ready to enter the NM process. The FD is responsible for gauging that someone looks to have been active in Debian enough to assign them an AM. Don Armstrong -- Build a fire for a man, an he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. -- Jules Bean http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100706210101.ge27...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Conflicts between Developers: Let others mediate
If you ever find yourself in a situtation where you are in conflict with another developer, and you're unable to make headway, please rely on others to mediate. You can contact the DPL (lea...@debian.org) or the CTTE (for technical matters) or even myself or any other Developer you trust. Don Armstrong -- Democracy is more dangerous than fire. Fire can't vote itself immune to water. -- Michael Z. Williamson http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100701182342.gw27...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: debian-private declassification team (looking for one)
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010, Frans Pop wrote: I would welcome a new GR to rescind the previous one and revert d-private to what it's always been: private. That way we can stop worrying about the whole issue and we will no longer run the risk of making things public that their authors do not want to be made public. My own opinion is that we've done this backwards, and that everything on -private modulo vacation messages and posts explicitely marked with a header indicating that they shouldn't be declassified should be declassified automatically after three years. Unfortunatly, a large majority[1] of the messages to -private shouldn't be private in the first place, or they only need to be embargoed for a short period of time. [I think I've sent more messages to people requesting that they not continue non-private (or just plain useless) threads in -private than I've read messages which were actually useful and contained information that needed to be on -private.] Don Armstrong 1: Ignoring VAC messages, of course. -- Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. -- Robert Heinlein http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100625222014.gt31...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: debian-private declassification team (looking for one)
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010, Frans Pop wrote: On Saturday 26 June 2010, Don Armstrong wrote: My own opinion is that we've done this backwards, and that everything on -private modulo vacation messages and posts explicitely marked with a header indicating that they shouldn't be declassified should be declassified automatically after three years. But that's not what the project decided to do, so it's rather moot. It may be moot for the current -private archives, but we can always change going forward.[1] Unfortunatly, a large majority[1] of the messages to -private shouldn't be private in the first place, or they only need to be embargoed for a short period of time. Any real evidence to support that rather strong claim? From our most recent huge thread, with 97 messages, 50 of them at least were trivially off topic; only about 15 of them contained any useful information discussing the actual content, and the rest were near-contentless +1/-1 messages. Two other threads of 30 and 41 mesages didn't belong on -private in the first place. So out of ≈210 non VAC messages, at least 111 of them didn't belong on -private (and probably 50 of those didn't belong on any Debian mailing list except -curiosa.) IMO most threads on d-private get started there because the sender actually wants the subject to be private. The very first message may be private (or partially so), but the main part of the discussion usually isn't, and certainly the OT leaves of the discussion aren't. [In past four big threads we were 2/4 of starting messages being appropriate for -private...] But it seems to me that those are also often the least interesting, so what's the gain in declassifying them? Little, which is why no one has bothered to spend the time to do so. [The fact that I feel strongly about openness and still won't spend the time to devote to declassifying -private speaks for itself...] IMO the whole idea of partial declassification stinks anyway. Is it really desirable to declassify some messages in a thread but not others? Does that give the public a balanced view of a discussion? If people are concerned about having their views represented when the discussion is declassified, they shouldn't withhold them from declassification. It also seems to me that in any declassification scheme the risk of declassifying a message which its author did not intend to ever become public is very high. Frankly, if someone sends a message to -private which they think should remain private forever, and it's not obvious that it should remain so to the normal DD, it probably didn't need to be read by a thousand DDs in the first place. Just consider that an objection also extends to any replies that quote (part) of it. Obviously. I think it's safer to err on the conservative side and simply respect the privacy of the list unconditionally. That option was further discussion, and lost... Don Armstrong 1: It's mootness certainly doesn't change my opinion that we made a mistake. [Hell, I seconded the current process, so *I* made a mistake too.] -- LEADERSHIP -- A form of self-preservation exhibited by people with autodestructive imaginations in order to ensure that when it comes to the crunch it'll be someone else's bones which go crack and not their own. -- The HipCrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan (John Brunner _Stand On Zanzibar_ p256-7) http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100625235121.gu31...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: Support timeframe
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010, Steve Smith wrote: In general, how long is a version for Debian supported? Generally speaking, 12-18 months after the release of a new stable version is when security support is stopped. Generally, that means between three and four years of support for a version. Ie, I believe that it is Microsoft's policy to stop providing support (patches, fixes, etc) after 6 years from a release. Is there any such policy for Debian and if so- what is it? What would it be for version 5? Ie, is it safe to say that version 5 will not be supported after 2014? Pretty safe, yes. Support will most likely be stopped some time in 2012. The reason why I ask is because we have a hardware appliance that is based on Debian and we are working on upgrading to version 5. Because the previous version is not longer supported, we need to provide a patch policy for our appliance. If it's something that you need security support for longer, you can certainly hire someone to continue security support (and any other backported fixes) to lenny, and possibly band together with others who need the same. Don Armstrong -- If everything seems to be going well, you have obviously overlooked something. -- Steven Wright http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100623181231.gd27...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: The role of debian-private
On Wed, 09 Jun 2010, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: [Christoph Berg, 2010-06-09] Too few MUAs have a button for don't bother me about new mail in this (sub-)thread. I wish all off-topic mails were marked with OT tag in the subject, dovecot moves such mails (including the ones tagged with VAC) to a different mailbox for me. Anything which is off-topic for -private doesn't need to be kept private, and should be moved to another list as soon as possible.[0] People who continue to post to such threads should be asked nicely to raise the subject in an appropriate mailing list and continue the discussion there. [And if the argument against moving it to the appropriate mailing list is because no one is subscribed to that mailing list, then no one cares about that topic anyway and the flogging should stop.] Don Armstrong 0: This is one of the reasons why I wish we had gone to compulsory declassification of -private for non-VAC mails, with the onus on people who want a thread to remain private to put forward the effort to redact the messages. -- It has always been Debian's philosophy in the past to stick to what makes sense, regardless of what crack the rest of the universe is smoking. -- Andrew Suffield in 20030403211305.gd29...@doc.ic.ac.uk http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100609214120.gv4...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: debian-private declassification team (looking for one)
On Sat, 22 May 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: Note that as of now, the team will just have to review less than 1.5 half of posts (which shouldn't be *that* daunting I guess), besides setting up a work-flow and decide upon the technical details of the actual publishing. I had actually glanced at working on this earlier, but stopped after a small bit of time, because it wasn't particularly useful, and because the sheer amount of work that it would require to satisfy the terms of the GR. (And frankly, the majority of the conversations in the archive either aren't interesting enough to bother publishing, or are on topics that such a large number of people will want their messages redacted, that it's kind of useless.) Don Armstrong -- Some pirates achieved immortality by great deeds of cruelty or derring-do. Some achieved immortality by amassing great wealth. But the captain had long ago decided that he would, on the whole, prefer to achieve immortality by not dying. -- Terry Pratchet _The Color of Magic_ http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100522195313.ge4...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: Money for Debian
On Fri, 09 Apr 2010, eric wrote: I am french, excuse me for the fault in English Language. It is possible for you to create a Paypal account to help you, it's more easy for users. You can donate by clicking on the Click and Pledge link here: http://www.spi-inc.org/donations and indicate that the money should go to Debian. It's just as easy as using Paypal, and you don't need a Paypal account. SPI (the US umbrella organization for Debian) does not use Paypal because of Paypal's problematic history of mismanaging accounts. Don Armstrong -- Grimble left his mother in the food store and went to the launderette and watched the clothes go round. It was a bit like color television only with less plot. -- Clement Freud _Grimble_ http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100409191645.gf21...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: Invite to join the Release Team
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Matthew Johnson wrote: I'm confused as to why you are expecting to be involved in or be informed about a meeting of a team you are not a part of? If a team is meeting, the meeting and agenda should be announced, and the decisions and discussions which occur in the meeting should be made as public and available as possible, as soon as possible. It doesn't have to be perfect, and it doesn't need to be pretty, but meetings without announcements and notes should be avoided as much as possible in Debian. You shouldn't have to be part of a team to find out what a team in Debian is doing. Don Armstrong -- After the first battle of Sto Lat, I formulated a policy which has stood me in good stead in other battles. It is this: if an enemy has an impregnable stronghold, see he stays there. -- Terry Pratchett _Jingo_ p265 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- 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/20100315212451.gx4...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: What to do about negligent maintainers?
On Sat, 09 Jan 2010, Charles Plessy wrote: But anyway, the ‘first adopter served’ tradition is a source of problems. Package maintainers can choose who they wish to let adopt their packages. If the package is orphaned or the maintainer is MIA, the person who discovers that the package is MIA or orphaned is often the person who actually ends up maintaining it (or at least is probably qualified to maintain it if they actually have the time.) Only in those cases where the current package maintainer and a prospective package maintainer are unable to agree does the CTTE need to be brought in to decide. [The CTTE will take at minimum two weeks to come to a decision itself.] Don Armstrong -- Sentenced to two years hard labor (for sodomy), Oscar Wilde stood handcuffed in driving rain waiting for transport to prison. If this is the way Queen Victoria treats her prisoners, he remarked, she doesn't deserve to have any. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Distributing software written by hostile upstream developers
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009, Matthew Johnson wrote: On Thu Sep 10 12:53, Steve McIntyre wrote: Well, what happens if somebody wants to maintain software where there is a strong set of opinion that we don't want it? In this case, I'd like to delegate the power to the ftpmasters to say so and reject from NEW etc. If we have a clear consensus that that would be OK then fine; otherwise I'd like to run this through the GR process to make sure the project as a whole agrees. Isn't that a TC job? overruling developers? The CTTE cannot overrule non-technical decisions of developers. [§6.1.4 only applies to technical decisions.] I suppose the project leader/ftpmasters could delegate this to the CTTE under §5.1.4 and the CTTE could make a decision under §6.1.3, but I'm not sure how that would interoperate with §6.1.4. Presumably the project leader has the authority to override non-technical decisions that affect the project under §5.1.4. Don Armstrong -- It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies. Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject? -- Robert Fisk http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: so ... let's merge DAM and FD?
On Thu, 02 Jul 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: Richard Hecker wrote: While consensus might exist that eliminating bureaucracy is good, division of labor can be a good thing too. I do not think you have established the need to combine the FD and DAM tasks. Are you claiming the DAMs are too bureaucratic? No, what is bureaucratic is having to wait one month for FD to review one application, just to say `hey it's complete`, and pass it to the DAM. Then wait another month. I don't see the point in it being reviewed twice if FD has no say in the final decision and his only task is to check that everything is complete. The main point is that the task has historically been more parallizable at the FD point than at the DAM point; DAM is a delegation, and the FD is not. (And since FD has the DAM as a backstop, there's not as much scrutiny[1] in adding new people to that position.) Thus, it's better to catch problems and solve them at the FD stage instead of waiting until they reach the DAM. That said, the obvious solution to this issue is to get more poeple who have the time and desire to be FD/DAM involved and demonstrate ability. Don Armstrong -- I don't care how poor and inefficient a little country is; they like to run their own business. I know men that would make my wife a better husband than I am; but, darn it, I'm not going to give her to 'em. -- The Best of Will Rogers http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: DAM and NEW queues processing
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Steve Langasek wrote: Ok - then I guess my problem is that the list of names included in these is so non-notable (and is empty most weeks anyway...) that it doesn't register at all with me. Would it be enough to just have a special automated mail congratulating new developers on -newmaint (or modify the subject of this mail to congratulate them?) Don Armstrong -- Our days are precious, but we gladly see them going If in their place we find a thing more precious growing A rare, exotic plant, our gardener's heart delighting A child whom we are teaching, a booklet we are writing -- Frederick Rükert _Wisdom of the Brahmans_ [Hermann Hesse _Glass Bead Game_] http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: DAM and NEW queues processing
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: Your concept fails - usually the problematic issues are not even mentioned in debian/copyright. And if somebody is able to download packages from the NEW queue Debian is distributing them. This could be worked around by just showing the diff.gz and a link to the upstream codebase; cases where the upstream codebase are repacked would either have an appropriate target in debian/rules or require the current process as a fallback. But all of that said, it still needs trusted people to review the packages, which is where we've traditionally started to have scaling problems. [It's one of the cases where the work isn't particularly visible until the people doing the work get overwhelmed, so they don't get kudos, and only get complaints: a classic recipe for accelerated burnout.] Don Armstrong -- Facts are the refuge of people unwilling to reassess what they hold to be True. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Who uses @packages.d.o mail?
On Mon, 01 Jun 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le dimanche 24 mai 2009 à 13:12 -0700, Don Armstrong a écrit : I think adding the lists.debian.org and bugs.debian.org ruleset[1] to packages.debian.org (possibly with some tweaks) will help resolve the issue with spam flowing through packages.debian.org. BTW, would it be possible to port them to alioth as well? The amount of spam on lists.alioth.debian.org is getting really cumbersome. I wouldn't see why not; the ruleset is publicly available, and the setup is pretty trivial. [Just link in a modified user_prefs, modify update_spamassassin to work on lists.alioth.debian.org, and chuck it into a convenient crontab.] However, I don't have access to l.a.d.o or the p.d.o set-up,[1] so someone who does needs to drive it. Don Armstrong 1: And in all honesty, I don't have a great deal of time in the near future to deal with it either, though I probably could do the initial setup. -- [The] JK-88 [coffee] percolator is capable of acheiving the ultimate balance of aroma and density, aftertaste and emollience, pentosans and tannins. The next step is to reduce the cost of the HPLC-E technology to the point where it can be manufactured for less than the cost of a Boeing 757. -- Charles Stross Extracts from the Club Diary in _Toast_ p83-4 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Who uses @packages.d.o mail?
On Sun, 24 May 2009, Marco d'Itri wrote: On May 23, Steve M. Robbins st...@sumost.ca wrote: I'm open to other options, of course. What is the recommended practice for this scenario? Implement spam filtering? I think adding the lists.debian.org and bugs.debian.org ruleset[1] to packages.debian.org (possibly with some tweaks) will help resolve the issue with spam flowing through packages.debian.org. [The only other issue is that packages.debian.org's MX is on a restricted machine, so we'd need wider access to the mail logs to track down false positives.] Don Armstrong 1: svn://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-listmaster/trunk/spamassassin_config -- If you find it impossible to believe that the universe didn't have a creator, why don't you find it impossible that your creator didn't have one either? -- Anonymous Coward http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=167556cid=13970629 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: forums.debian.net disabled
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, Akis Panas wrote: It is not known when or if or how forums.debian.net will return. Will the debian project continue to provide hosting for the debian users forum on the same server? Assuming a set of administrators is willing to care and feed whatever forum software they decide to use, the DSA team[1] has intimated that they will be willing to host it. If yes does your server allows the use of the last phpbb version? Current version is 3.0.4 The forum was running on 2.xx version witch is no longer supported by the phpbb team, http://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=14t=1385785 The primary issue is that there wasn't a set of administrators with time enough to actively care for the forum software to even notice that this was the case.[2] As per the reply comment regarding the level of the forum: Well the same applies to the debian lists , do you suggest to shut them down also in favor on 10 - 100 members of the troll kingdom? Insert pithy, hypocritical responsible that bites back here Don Armstrong 1: Which doesn't include me 2: Not really their fault either; time doesn't grow on trees. -- I'm a rational being--of a sort--rational enough, at least, to see the symptoms of insanity around me. And I'm human, the same as the people I think of as victims when my guard drops. It's at least possible I'm even crazier than my fellows, whom I'm tempted to pity. There seems only one thing to do, and that's get drunk -- Chad C. Mulligan (John Brunner _Stand On Zanzibar_ p390) http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: DPL Debates [Re: Debian Project Leader Election 2009]
On Mon, 09 Mar 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote: If someone can't set up a poll, I'll send another message asking for DDs to privately mail me (or maybe me-too to -vote) if they find the debates useful. http://doodle.com/nmpesn9t5fwv6ewe Having this run for 7 days now, we had 72 participants. The question asked was Are the Debian DPL IRC Debates useful and should we keep them? and people could chose Yes, No, I don't care, never looked at one. and we have Yes 34 No 32 Don't care 12 Based on these results, my own personal thoughts, and some brief discussion with the candidates, I'm leaning heavily towards not expending the effort on a debate this time around. I think much more could be gained from good discussions about the platforms here in -vote, and followups with the candidates on IRC (Sledge [Steve] and zack [Stefano] are highly active on IRC) than the debate itself. Also, since Stefano and Steve are in similar timezones, odds are good that you all can get them to engage each other on #debian-devel on an ad-hoc basis about the specific questions that bother you specifically, without having to wait for the rigamarole of an IRC debate. Don Armstrong -- People selling drug paraphernalia ... are as much a part of drug trafficking as silencers are a part of criminal homicide. -- John Brown, DEA Chief http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
DPL Debates [Re: Debian Project Leader Election 2009]
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009, Debian Project Secretary wrote: | Period | Start| End| |+--+| | Nomination | Sunday, March 1st, 2009 | Saterday, March 7th, 2009 | | Campaign | Sunday, March 8th, 2009 | Saterday, March 28th, 2009 | | Vote | Sunday, March 29th, 2009 | Saterday, April 11th, 2009 | I suggest that potential DPL candidates start getting their platform ready. I would like to receive them before the campaign period start. As I've apparently volunteered to moderate the debate again,[0] it falls to me to remind prospective candidates to calculate their schedule for the week of the 21st-28th, and soon after they self nominate forward the times during that week which they can absolutely not debate as well as times that they'd rather not debate to me. [This will help me to avoid having to schedule the debate smack in the middle of some erstwhile candidate's coffin time.[0.577]] Those who have suggestions for alterations to the format can also make those known in a reply to this message (refer to last year's debate format[1] if you've forgotten what we did last year, suffer from amnesia or are incapable of forming long term memories or faking them by the creative use of google and blogs). People who'd like to help run the debate and/or collect questions can also volunteer with a message to -vote. Don Armstrong 0: I know I should heed my major professor's most important lesson learned from his military service: never be first, never be last, never volunteer... but I always seem to fall asleep before the conclusion is reached. 0.577: Deity forbid that the day star attack you.[1.618] 1: http://svn.donarmstrong.com/don/trunk/projects/debian/dpl_debates/debate_rules_public.txt 1.618: Yes, for some reason I've adopted irrational footnote numbering. Don't ask why.[2.718] 2.718: Ok... it has something to do with NIH R01 grant deadlines and collaborators who are incapable of using LaTeX+BibTeX, and want to make me (more) insane instead. [3.14] 3.14: Imagine a pithy footnote here. I've given up and gone to the pub. -- Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron. -- Dwight Eisenhower, April 16, 1953 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lenny release at epoche 1234567890 ?
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, Martin Meredith wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:14:53PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Gebhardt Thomas gebha...@hrz.uni-marburg.de (10/02/2009): just noticed that epoche 1234567890 is at 2009-02-14. That would be a release date that is easy to remember. 49862854.1070...@googlemail.com I so need to write a function that'll let me search my mails in mutt based on message id :D / i~49862854.1070...@googlemail.com See http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/manual-4.html#ss4.2 for details. Don Armstrong -- Sentenced to two years hard labor (for sodomy), Oscar Wilde stood handcuffed in driving rain waiting for transport to prison. If this is the way Queen Victoria treats her prisoners, he remarked, she doesn't deserve to have any. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Project machines upgrade
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009, Martin Meredith wrote: Which is a list that until I read this thread here in -project, I'd never heard of. I think that it's important that Developers are aware of infrastructure issues, and should be made aware of them (so they don't start getting headaches when things don't work!) It was mentioned on d-d-a a while ago: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/05/msg3.html, http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/05/msg00013.html et al. I think though, that this is more of a case of a documentation issue though, the infrastructure-announce should probably be mentioned in some places alongside d-d-a, so people who're interested can subscribe. It's documented here, along with all of the other lists: http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/subscribe That said, submit patches if you dig up places where it isn't but should be. [The reason why it's separated out is because those messages aren't particularly useful to people who aren't direct users of the infrastructure, which is orthogonal to development activity in Debian (though they sometimes intersect.)] Don Armstrong -- If you find it impossible to believe that the universe didn't have a creator, why don't you find it impossible that your creator didn't have one either? -- Anonymous Coward http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=167556cid=13970629 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009, Chris Waters wrote: On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 09:17:28AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: (Don has, after subsequent argument, modified this to “… that you don't plan on ranking above Further Discussion”.) Bad, bad idea! What if you are planning to rank Further Discussion as 1, but staill have a compromise you'd be willing to accept that you think is _far_ better than anything _else_ that's been proposed? If you're willing to accept a compromise, you rank it above further discussion. The very point of ranking FD above an option is to indicate that you don't find a specific option an acceptable solution at all, and would rather have futher discussion than accepting it. Don Armstrong -- Of course, there are cases where only a rare individual will have the vision to perceive a system which governs many people's lives; a system which had never before even been recognized as a system; then such people often devote their lives to convincing other people that the system really is there and that it aught to be exited from. -- Douglas R. Hofstadter _Gödel Escher Bach. Eternal Golden Braid_ http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009, Chris Waters wrote: Part of the problem is that we never have no, just no on our ballots, so the only alternative is to vote further discussion, even if you have no interest whatsoever in any further discussion, and, as far as you're concerned, the matter is settled. You can easily propose and/or second an option that reaffirms the status quo if you think the matter should be settled completely. If not enough people second it, then the status quo isn't acceptable to enough people in the project for it to be a viable option. So, if it's harder to add options, people are more likely to vote for choices they really don't like. (I know that I have.) The idea is to make it more difficult to add options so that options that have no chance of winning are not added. Secondarily, it's to try to get people to spend more time in the deliberation stage to perfect the options and achieve compromise before an option ends up on the ballot. Ideally this will mean that we'll have options that represent large parts of the project, with compromises that are acceptable to all of the project, with no options that are only acceptable to small parts of the project. Don Armstrong -- The attackers hadn't simply robbed the bank. They had carried off everything portable, including the security cameras, the carpets, the chairs, and the light and plumbing fixtures. The conspirators had deliberately punished the bank, for reasons best known to themselves, or to their unknown controllers. They had superglued doors and shattered windows, severed power and communications cables, poured stinking toxins into the wallspaces, and concreted all of the sinks and drains. In eight minutes, sixty people had ruined the building so thoroughly that it had to be condemned and later demolished. -- Bruce Sterling, _Distraction_ p4 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009, MJ Ray wrote: Sorry - I'm with Wouter Verhelst on this. Having options on the ballot that only a small minority of DDs support can help resolve conflicts: it lays them to rest, demonstrating they fail in the wider DD population, If an option can't get seconds enough to pass K (or Q), it doesn't have support in the DD population or the proposers are lazy, and don't want to find enough support. In either case, people's time shouldn't be wasted with the effort required to run a vote and vote in it. rather than the DDs supporting them being able to blame the self-selecting subset who participate on debian-vote. If DDs who support them are unable to gather enough seconds via -vote, nothing stops them from finding other people who support the proposal using other methods. Furthermore, there are at least 103 DDs subscribed to -vote[1], so arguments about some self-selecting subset are a bit misplaced (not that that'll stop them from being made.) Even if the number of seconds for a proposal is raised to something massive like 2Q, would it be worth keeping the number of seconds for a partial amendment at K? If we're going to have the trouble of votes, we might as well vote as comprehensively as possible... Additional options on a ballot means that voters have to spend additional time to process the option and differentiate it between all other options. When multiplied by the number of people who vote, that becomes a non-trivial waste of voter's time for options which couldn't find enough seconders who actually support the option. If an option can't get enough seconds from people who support that option to satisfy K (or even Q), not enough people support it for it to have a chance of being supported by a majority of people in an election that meets quorum. Don Armstrong 1: 102 subscriptions with @debian.org$ addresses, anyway. (For comparison, there are 147 subscribed to -devel, 112 to -project, and 324 to d-d-a.) I've no clue about actual DD readership or whether people actually read it or /dev/null it. Maybe they use it in place of almanacs in their out buildings. -- Three little words. (In descending order of importance.) I love you -- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid.com/graphics/batch35.php http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 04:18:02PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: 1: I'd be happier, though, if those proposing and seconding options would be more careful about the effects that their options may have, and be more vigilant about withdrawing options when more palletable options exist. You should not be proposing or seconding an option that you don't plan on ranking first. Anthony Towns seconded his own recall vote, as DPL. Do you think he should not have done that? He voted 21 (FD over recall), so no. Of coure, that option had more than 5 othere seconds, each of whom voted 12, so it didn't do anything to cause us to vote on an option that we wouldn't of had a need to vote on otherwise. Since 48 people voted 12, the K (or Q, 1.5Q or 2Q) seconds could have easily come from them. I seconded both proposal B and proposal D on 2004_004, and did not rank both equally at number one (rather, I voted proposal B at 1, and proposal D at 2). Do you think I should not have done that? That's fine, since you ranked them both highly. There's a benefit to seconding options which represent compromises that you support. There's no benefit to seconding options which you do not, just to see them go down in flames in the election. [If an option cannot get the required number of seconders from people who actually support it, it's almost assuredly going down in flames in the election.] In general, I believe it is okay to second a ballot option that you do not plan to rank first if you feel it is an important matter that you want to see resolved. The statement I second this proposal only means I want to see this voted on, not I support this statement, and I think that's a good thing. I disagree. We shouldn't be having votes or options on the ballot purely for the sake of having votes or options on the ballot. Our voting process exists to resolve conflicts in a manner that DDs support; having options that DDs do not support on the ballot does not help that process. I view seconding as a trial run for a particular option involving a smaller number of people who vouch their support for that option so that the entire project does not have to be involved in dealing with options that do not have wide enough support to even have a chance of winning. Making the seconding process more difficult by increasing the number of seconds and trying to avoid seconding options that we ourselves do not support will help keep the project at large from wasting time reading and understanding ballot options that are not widely supported. Don Armstrong -- There's nothing remarkable about it. All one has to do is hit the right keys at the right time and the instrument plays itself. -- Bach http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Joerg Jaspert wrote: Therefore the Debian project resolves that a) The constitution gets changed to not require K developers to sponsor a resolution, but floor(2Q). [see §4.2(1)] b) Delaying a decision of a Delegate or the DPL [§4.2(2.2)], as well as resolutions against a shortening of discussion/voting period or to overwrite a TC decision [§4.2(2.3)] requires floor(Q) developers to sponsor the resolution. c) the definition of K gets erased from the constitution. [§4.2(7)] Whatever we decide to do should specifically modify the constitution; that is a) §4.2.1 is replaced with The Developers follow the Standard Resolution Procedure, below. A resolution or amendment is introduced if proposed by any Developer and sponsored by at least floor(2Q) other Developers, or if proposed by the Project Leader or the Technical Committee. b) §4.2.2.2 is replaced with If such a resolution is sponsored by at least floor(Q) Developers, or if it is proposed by the Technical Committee, the resolution puts the decision immediately on hold (provided that resolution itself says so). etc. I'd also suggest alternatively, that we change K to be floor(Q), and modify §4.2.1 to be 2K, §4.2.2.2 to be K, and §4.2.2.3 to be left alone, which would have the same effect, but with fewer changes (and we could define floor(Q) instead of assuming it to be known.) Because quorum is 3Q, this would mean that any option will have enough voters to conceivably win in an election. [I would also be ok with K==1.5Q, and requiring at least K developers for each step.] All that said, I'd be interested in seeing such a change made.[1] Don Armstrong 1: I'd be happier, though, if those proposing and seconding options would be more careful about the effects that their options may have, and be more vigilant about withdrawing options when more palletable options exist. You should not be proposing or seconding an option that you don't plan on ranking first. -- This message brought to you by weapons of mass destruction related program activities, and the letter G. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008, Ben Finney wrote: Another purpose, that I've seen recently a few times, is people proposing *several* discrete options for a ballot, carefully phrasing them to be distinct in order to clarify the meaning of the vote's result. If no one is going to rank those options highly, there's no purpose in proposing them. I could see someone drafting them as an option for someone else who planned on ranking them highly to actually propose and second. According to Don's statement above, this is not a good reason to propose options. I disagree; I think it's commendable and in the spirit of his earlier statement (in the same message) to strive for clarity and precision in the ballot options. Options that (almost) no one actually supports don't increase clarity. Our voting system isn't a survey of developers; it's a means of making decisions. Don Armstrong -- Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it. -- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Spamming the World through Open Debian Mailinglists (Re: lists.debian.org has received bounces from you)
On Sat, 27 Dec 2008, Jeroen Massar wrote: [maybe the Listmaster of the day is able to read when other people get involved in this] The listmasters are responsible for the lists. Sending mail to -project isn't particularly useful, as it's not on topic there. [For those on -project; this reply is going there just to see that someone has replied; I personally won't respond further, save via listmas...@.] Cord Beermann wrote: Hallo! Du (Jeroen Massar) hast geschrieben: (http://lists.debian.org/bounces/iLpJvMjXJJDuaeJK2W6wdA) Stop forwarding spam already! I've mentioned this before. There is a VERY simple solution to this problem btw: make the list subscriber-post-only, as the subscriber base is small (and the real traffic too) it will be hard for the spammers to guess a correct source address. We are aware that Debian-Mailinglists aren't 100% spam-free, but if you can't accept that, don't subscribe to our lists. The spam-check is not even needed if you would simply close it, as I wrote. We aren't going to close the lists that are currently open in the forseeable future. If this is a problem for you, feel free to unsubscribe. If you would change that little thing (making the lists post-by-subscribers only) then that spam would not get forwarded by the list because the spammers are not signed up in the first place Spammers have already signed up to our lists on multiple occasions. (okay, the spammer could get smart, guess a correct source etc, but then only PGP/DKIM/SPF or whatever could save your day) We already check these when appropriate, and use them to score mail. You claim the mailbox does 50k mails per day, and 2500 spams make it through the filters (cool that you know that btw, if you know it is spam, why don't you filter them?) Because we don't know that it's spam at the time we send them out, obviously. [And yes, this means that we're sending somewhere around 5% spam; we discard well over 99% of it, though, and we're constantly improving our setup to discard more and more of it.] And having to sign up every once in a while to a Debian list is really annoying because you get kicked off because you are forwarding spam. If you don't want to deal with the occasional spam that gets through, then feel free to unsubscribe. Furthemore, the thresholds for automatic unsubscription are set fairly high anyway; the warning messages we send out are for your information only, as they often indicate mail misconfigurations at your end (or rarely, at ours.) Just turn on the subscribe-only bit already, that makes it easy for EVERYONE and solves all these crappy issues you are having. It doesn't solve the issues, it doesn't make it easier for everyone, nor is it a solution that we're going to employ on the lists that are currently open in the foreseeable future. And yes, my SMTP server and those of a lot of other people will CORRECTLY refuse to accept mail classified as spam and correctly give a 500 SMTP error code as the server will refuse to deliver it. If you sign up for mail from mailing lists, just discard mail that you don't want to read that comes in from us with Priority: bulk or List-* headers instead of bouncing it. A mailing list is little more than a glorified mail forwarder: bouncing forwarded mail is wrong. Don Armstrong -- [T]he question of whether Machines Can Think, [...] is about as relevant as the question of whether Submarines Can Swim. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra The threats to computing science http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: PATCH for spamass-milter to solve Debian list spam-bounce issue (Was:- Spamming the World through Open Debian Mailinglists....)
On Sat, 27 Dec 2008, Jeroen Massar wrote: As you might have noticed, the unsubscribe already happens, fully automatically, by the list software, because it thinks one is bouncing because of the spams. (Above patch solves that bit). Unless you're also bouncing lots of legitimate list mail, or are subscribed to lists that send almost no legitimate mail, you won't be automatically unsubcribed. The thresholds are set relatively high to avoid this. it seems also that my setup does know how to figure out that it is spam but yours doesn't. If you're running SA later on mails than we are, you'll catch dynamic rules that have been added in between; the mail in question got 3.7 out of 4. That will really take care of your spam by adding a few more rules that are really helpful. We already run a huge corpus of custom rules. See http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/FAQ for more information. Don Armstrong -- Miracles had become relative common-places since the advent of entheogens; it now took very unusual circumstances to attract public attention to sightings of supernatural entities. The latest miracle had raised the ante on the supernatural: the Virgin Mary had manifested herself to two children, a dog, and a Public Telepresence Point. -- Bruce Sterling, _Holy Fire_ p228 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Linux System Engineer (100%) in Zurich
First off, can we please refrain from uselessly crossposting? This isn't a job offer, so it doesn't belong on -jobs. I'm not even convinced that it belongs on -project, but I'll respond here once since it's at least marginally related to the project. In the future, if you have a concern about the management of the Debian mailing lists, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the right place to contact. On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, W. Martin Borgert wrote: I would very much appreciate, if Debian would not publish job offers that discriminate on the grounds of race, ethnic origin, disability, age, gender, sexual orientation or religion. Not only it is illegal in some countries, I find it highly inappropriate for our project. If moderation was occuring before mailing list distribution, this would be a requeest to consider. As there isn't, there's not much to discuss. Please consider contacting privately those who post jobs whose requirements you find objectionable and educating them with regards to their local laws and/or your views of acceptable organizational behavior instead. Debian itself isn't publishing these offers, nor should you construe any posting on any mailing list as an approval (or disapproval) of any thought or ideal by the Debian project itself. Please feel free to unsubscribe from mailing lists if this is problematic. Don Armstrong (for himself) -- Who is thinking this? I am. -- Greg Egan _Diaspora_ p38 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release notes
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008, Peter Palfrader wrote: I need information where debbugs, http://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/ moved to, similar to what is available from the READMEs in /srv/cvs.debian.org/cvs/qa. Can you provide that? Sorry for not telling anyone about that. Don Armstrong -- A Bill of Rights that means what the majority wants it to mean is worthless. -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is this really from your company or is it spam?
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, Sport Fishing Institute of BC wrote: Hello I received this e-mail from the address listed below and I just want to see if it is really from your company before I respond to it. It's got nothing to do with us; the address in question is actually a mailing list dealing with a free operating system called Debian GNU/Hurd. [It's not only not a person, it doesn't advertise, and moreover it doesn't appeal broadly to your target demographic.] Don Armstrong -- My spelling ability, or rather the lack thereof, is one of the wonders of the modern world. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DEP1: Non Maintainer Uploads (final call for review)
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, MJ Ray wrote: Even so, why should language style be a weight-of-numbers thing? Interestingly, that's exactly what language and style is about. English is plastic, and as the usage of people who use english changes, so does the language and its style. Don Armstrong -- Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you really want to test his character, give him power. -- Abraham Lincoln http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: my treatment in #debian
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008, Rahul Jain wrote: As a regular in #debian (on OPN/freenode) for over 5 years and a contributor to the debian project, one would expect that I would be treated slightly better by the ops than random newbies. We hold everyone who contributes to the channel to high standards. People who regularly contribute to the channel are expected to be more considerate of people who have a problem and are frustrated because of that, and to attack the problem, not the person having the problem. Being a regular, you should have seen how all of the ops, including stew deal with combatitive users calmly, answering questions even in the face of infantile behavoir, and ideally learned from it. I'm sure you've seen me (dondelelcaro) ban and/or silence multiple people for continued personal attacks. That, however, is not the case. stew (Mike O'Connor) seems to have some personal vendetta against me and will silence me at the slightest mention of something negative about anyone else. I've reviewed the logs of the instance in question, and temporarily silencing you (as was done) to attempt to return the channel to positively attacking the problem was an appropriate action, and one that I would have taken had I been there myself. You could have easily resolved this issue yourself by dealing politely with the user, and utilizing /ignore if the user's problem was especially aggravating. Sometimes, my entire company, ITA Software (approx 500 people), is silenced, and the developers here are active debian users and supporters to a large degree, particlularly the ones with the most linux experience here. Silences often have side effects. We try to minimize them, and if at any time one of your colleagues were to ask for an exemption, it would be granted as a matter of course. Maybe I am just not wanted in the debian community, and I should refrain from contributing. That's entirely your decision to make. However, please weigh contributions you make to the community in terms of their positive and negative aspects, and refrain from making negative contributions. Don Armstrong -- The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. -- Adolf Hitler _Mein Kampf_ p403 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DEP1: how to do an NMU
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008, Frans Pop wrote: If you want to create a package for local testing, fine. If you create a package for upload: no. In some cases packages should not be NMUed at all. Or certainly not before the maintainer has had a chance to review the patch *at a time when it suites the maintainer* instead of within a time limit imposed by whatever value the author of the patch chose for DELAYED. No matter what is done, there is a time limit for the review of patches which fix RC bugs, whether stated or not. If a maintainer is unable to respond to a patch for an RC bug in a reasonable timeframe, they should expect an NMU. It matters little how the timeframe is enforced; it's there regardless. Non-RC bug fixes are an entirely different beast, but NMUs for them are generally discouraged anyway. Don Armstrong -- Mozart tells us what it's like to be human, Beethoven tells us what it's like to be Beethoven, and Bach tells us what it's like to be the universe. -- Douglas Adams http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DEP1: Clarifying policies and workflows for Non Maintainer Uploads (NMUs)
On Fri, 30 May 2008, Charles Plessy wrote: Are you sure that the BTS can not operate without the changelogs? The BTS needs the changelogs in order to know that the next version is a descendant of the NMU, instead of a descendant of the previous non-NMU, so you either need to include the NMU changelog, or you need to separately close the bugs in your changelog if you don't include it. Don Armstrong -- Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society. -- Mark Twain http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: $RANDOM_GMAIL_USER wants to chat
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, Amaya wrote: We are getting more and more of these emails, would it be very hard to filter them out? They sure make no sense, and have no place, in a mailing list. The pattern seems quite clear, and thus, should be easy to block: - Subject is $RANDOM_GMAIL_USER wants to chat - From has @gmail.com in it Just for those following along at home, this (and a few other rules) have already been added.[1] However, we're always looking for better rules, so if you can check out the subversion repository at http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-listmaster/trunk/spamassassin_config/ and submit patches to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don Armstrong 1: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-listmaster/trunk/spamassassin_config/common/phrase_spam?op=diffrev=192sc=0 -- I'd sign up in a hot second for any cellular company whose motto was: We're less horrible than a root canal with a cold chisel. -- Cory Doctorow http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
