Source files for buildd.d.o/~jeroen/status updated
Hi, http://buildd.d.o/~jeroen/status' source files as in use today are now available (as opposed to a horribly outdated tarball of them). I took the opportunity to import it into a version control system, and while at it, I decided to try out mercurial. So, as of a couple of minutes ago, you can 'hg clone static-http://buildd.debian.org/~jeroen/status/'. Of course, you can use hg to send patches to me (dunno whether it stores an email address anywhere, you can use [EMAIL PROTECTED] or my personal address at your discretion). Oh, btw, the following changes were implemented in the past two-or-so years, plus perhaps some that I didn't document: - Cope with '~' in version - Add proper html headers to each page - Add #successful/#total builds for each package in architecture overview - Hide queue lists if they are too long - Cope with extra w-b states - Fix encoding issues in url's - Add tooltip help to buildd states - Add possibility to show multiple packages at the same time in a table - Cope with binNMU's - Allow to also see w-b info for different suites - Directly use the w-b database, instead of the hourly summaries - Pimp layout by stealing css from Ian Enjoy, --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID search for lists.debian.org works properly again
Hi all, Sometimes you have a message-id of a mail that got sent to a Debian list, and you'd like to know what the URL is on the official web archives. For example, you want to post an url somewhere and only have the message-id in your mailbox, or you want to find out the link to a post you just made, or someone else gave you a message-id for a post, and you want to use the web archives. For this reason, a message-id search form had been created. You can find it at http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/ Two bugs in this were fixed today: - the fancy short URLs didn't work, nor did the extra options. This is now fixed. - In some cornercases, wrong links were generated. This was because of a wrong assumption about mhonarc's algorithm, now the search uses the mhonarc database itself so should always be correct. Please let me know of any feature requests and/or bug reports. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poll on the wiki (was About terminology for stable/testing/unstable)
On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 03:28:41PM -0500, Philippe Cloutier wrote: Christian chose suite before I posted suite vs branch. From an IRC discussion we had later, he was ambivalent between the two terms. Pierre Habouzit a écrit : IOW: We just don't need to bring this up _again_. Yet more discussion is currently equal with suite on the poll. So please vote, rather than $PICK_YOUR_JARGON_TERM. Voting is a pretty poor way to determine proper terminology. Fwiw, dak has always used 'suite', and speaking for myself, I'm disinclined to change terminology unless there's pretty good reason why to do so. Anyway, I fully agree with Pierre in this; how about fixing some RC bugs? --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@debian.org mail delivery problems for IPv6 MXs resolved
Hi all, Since Sarge 3.1r2, exim4 in stable has a fix for a routing logic error that caused mail, particularly but not necessarily exclusively for IPv6 MXs, to be wrongfully bounced and not delivered. This was most noticable for developers having their @debian.org email forwarded to a domain that has some IPv6 MXs. The problem was discussed on -devel in november/december last year, see for example http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/12/msg00308.html and #342619. Thanks go to in particular Florian Weimer and Marc Haber for nailing down the issue and to propose a fix. Since exim on master.debian.org, the MX for @debian.org, was recently upgraded, this problem should now no longer occur. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Third call for votes for the debian project leader election 2006
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:35:54AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: On Thursday 06 April 2006 23:55, Erinn Clark wrote: Do you mean this question? (Actually about ld, but it's the closest one I found that seemed appropriately irrelevant.) I3. What is the -Bsymbolic ld flag, exactly what does it do, and how that differs from library symbol versioning? What problems do -Bsymbolic linking solve? Why is libc6 not compiled with -Bsymbolic? I would guess this is a question from the TS part of the process, the part that is supposed to be tailored to the applicant. At least, I'm very happy to say, I have never seen this question during my NM process (which, as you probably know, was the translator/documentation writer track). I have seen the question, and answered it. If you were to ask it again to me, I wouldn't know the answer. I'd probably either do the same research again, or look in my NM archives -- I think the latter is probably fastest. I've never maintained a C library, though I did agree to help a little bit on some C++ library recently. I don't expect I'll go looking up what -Bsymbolic means even now. Is this question useless? I don't know. Apparantly, it didn't help me in any way. And this is the type of question that can get obsolete too. What is much more useful to test, but can't *that* easily be done with a fixed questionaire, is ensuring people can apply common sense, and can research things they need. From a DD, I expect that given a challenge, a technical packaging issue previously totally unkown, one can some way or the other resolve it. That is what you're doing as DD anyway, you get the weirdest issues in bugs, as user questions, etc, and you need to find a way to resolve that. Policy doesn't mention your special case, so you're on your own. I'd very much like for more emphasis being placed on such problem resolution capabilities, next to also interaction/communication capabilities (with bugreporters, fellow DDs, upstreams, etc etc). --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 09:09:01AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why would the existence of sarge point releases inspire confidence in our release cycle? Because the announcement title reads Debian GNU/Linux $foo updated. Sounds good for users, updated distributions are nice. But unstable and testing are updated daily, with new shiny stuff. Point releases contain for 99% fixes for embarassing bugs that we as a project failed to squash before the real release. It's great that we fixed them, still, of course. Why *should* it inspire confidence? The two processes are almost entirely unconnected. I know that, but most user don't know that. Public opinion is largely dictated by the usual newstickers - and a regular appearance with Debian releases/updates $BLA is good to give the impression that Debian is active. I know that some non-Debian people actually ask questions like I heard Debian has split and is dead, what will happen in the future? From time to time, just because Debian's PR work sucks so much. How about instead dominating the news tickers by reporting more noteworthy news? Debian launches beta of new graphical installer is a very noteworthy news item IMHO. Compare what really happened when g-i had its first test release: http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/13/0550229 Thanks to an anonymous slashdot reader, at least slashdot picked it up. I didn't read about it much on other sites. Previous DPLs have attempted in the past[1], and having more active interaction with the media is in my platform. --Jeroen [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2006/03/msg00191.html -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID lookup for lists.debian.org re-implemented
Hi, Based on the idea by Andrew Suffield[1], who terminated his service recently [2, 3], I reimplemented the message-id lookup to list archive page service that formerly was ran by Andrew. This implementation can deal correctly with multiple hits for a message ID (see the second and third example on the main page), and it seems to be a bit more efficient too (full run regenerating whole database takes 25 minutes, incremental run under 10 seconds). Also listmaster removals are dealt with correctly. This service is now located at http://lists.debian.org/~jeroen. You can work with it in two ways: use the html form located over there, or construct an URL yourself: http://lists.debian.org/~jeroen/$msgid If you append /firsthit, you will always be directed to the first occurance, even if there are more than one hits. The examples located at the main page should be self-explanatory. For those interested, code and db is available via master:~jeroen/mindx (and a tiny bit in ~jeroen/public_html/.htaccess) --Jeroen [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/10/msg00043.html http://lists.debian.org/~jeroen/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/01/msg00073.html http://lists.debian.org/~jeroen/[EMAIL PROTECTED] [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/01/msg00088.html http://lists.debian.org/~jeroen/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Poll: how should Debian derivatives identify their packages?
Continuing the experiment as outlined in [1] and [2], triggered by the discussion starting at [3], I hereby call for participation of Debian Developers in a poll, to attempt to gauge the opinion of The average DD[4] as good as it gets on the issue of what to do with the Maintainer field in packages shipped by derivatives of Debian. Please find below the ballot, include the interesting 9 lines in your signed reply to the poll submission address (see below or Reply-To:). You can find live results at [5]. Thank you for your participation, --Jeroen [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/12/msg00216.html [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/01/msg00110.html [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg00260.html [4] Limitation is due to the way devotee works, and hard to change. Patches welcome to allow others to vote too (perhaps also seperately tallied) [5] http://master.debian.org/~jeroen/polls/maintainer-field/ BALLOT This is an informal poll, conducted with devotee much like the way GR's and elections are done. The poll can only be submitted by DD's, and results will be non-anonymous and published immediately. Do not erase anything between the lines below and do not change the choice names. Please fill in, and send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with questions. Pointer to discussion: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg00260.html Thanks to Matt Zimmerman, Adeodato Simó, and others for help and suggestions -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 916d57b1-c5bb-4406-b4b1-a6d44fc8f412 [ ] Choice 1: Maintainer field should remain unmodified [ ] Choice 2: Change Maintainer on source changes only [ ] Choice 3: Change Maintainer on any change (including binary rebuild) [ ] Choice 4: Choice 3 + Preserve Maintainer: field as Debian-Maintainer: [ ] Choice 5: I don't care [ ] Choice 6: None of the above / Further discussion -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Some remarks with the options: 1. Choose this if you specifically want the Maintainer: field to not be changed not even for minor source updates unnecessarily. See also option 5 2. If a Debian source package is modified by a derivative relative to the source package in Debian, the Maintainer field should be changed to an appropriate contact within the derivative community 3. If a Debian source package is rebuilt (modified or unmodified) by a derivative, producing new binaries, the Maintainer field should be changed to an appropriate contact within the derivative community. 4. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg00077.html 5. Choose this if you don't mind either way, and consider it accepteable that derivatives decide for themselves /BALLOT -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: For those who care about their packages in Ubuntu
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 11:18:35PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote: Hi Matt, Matt Zimmerman wrote: I cannot recall any time when differing opinions have resulted in silence on a Debian mailing list. I think the silence is due to the fact that people give it low priority. You have all my sympathy for the uncomfortable position that puts you (well, your position) in. This isn't too original, but how about just having a Debian wiki page where people who don't want their name as Maintainer can sign up and for them rename the field to Debian-Maintainer or something. Sounds like an excellent opportunity to hold a poll about: http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/12/msg00216.html Please send proposed ballot(-items) to me personally, and I'll set it up tomorrow or so. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Experiment: poll on switching to vim-tiny for standard vi?
(Please followup to -project if you're replying on the subject of holding polls like this -- the discussion on holding polls is not technical, so does not belong to -devel. For opinions on nvi versus vim, please reply elsewhere in the current thread, this subthread isn't the place for it) For the full discussion leading up to this, please start at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/12/msg00796.html To repeat myself from http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/12/msg01066.html: On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 03:45:51PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: ] I don't think it's easily possible to count on people contributing to ] this thread to be representative, [...] Looking at popcon, vim has ] about twice the amount of users as nvi, while nvi is the default vi, ] and vim is merely optional. ] ] I think this is an excellent question to phrase with a few options in a ] devotee-poll, and have people vote on it -- results being purely ] advisory, the poll just being informative, and any results updated live, ] rather than only after a delay. I think it'd be good to representative ] polls on a reasonably regularly basis -- close to the same ] representativeness, and stil much much more lighter than a GR, so easier ] to just do when some people feel a more clear idea of what the average ] DD thinks is needed than what one can gather from a mailinglist thread. Because this is certainly not the first time I was curious on the opinion of the so called Silent majority (if such beast exists at all), I decided to simply try out this idea. Therefore, I've set up devotee (thanks to Manoj for writing it!) on [EMAIL PROTECTED], with results updated near realtime on http://master.debian.org/~jeroen/polls/. To participate in the context of the nvi vs vim-tiny discussion, please fill in the below ballot, sign it, and submit it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's currently only available to DD's, for practical reasons more than for any fundamental reason -- being a poll, I do think that opinions of non-DD's is certainly good to have too, possibly simply both tallied for DD only and for 'all'. This polling thingy works just like a real vote, except: - It is a poll, a query to the opinion of people. - As such, results will be public, - and updated in near realtime - There is no real deadline per se, as this is not intended as a decision making instrument, at best a decision-making support instrument. Some polls will simply stop being relevant at some point, or maybe will remain of continued relevance. I'm curious how this pans out. I intend to launch more polls when I get good idea's to hold one, so let me know if you have one. BALLOT (Also found on http://master.debian.org/~jeroen/polls/vi/ballot) This is an informal poll, conducted with DeVoteE much like the way GR's and elections are done. Do not erase anything between the lines below and do not change the choice names. Please fill in, and send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- f811dfe7-4e13-423c-8062-8dae621caf0c [ ] Choice 1: Keep nvi as the default vi in base [ ] Choice 2: Replace nvi by vim-tiny [ ] Choice 3: Further discussion - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- /BALLOT --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Experiment: poll on switching to vim-tiny for standard vi?
(dropping -devel, as this is about the general idea of polling) On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 03:49:44PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 09:14:16PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: Because this is certainly not the first time I was curious on the opinion of the so called Silent majority (if such beast exists at all), I decided to simply try out this idea. Therefore, I've set I have no sympathy for the notion of a silent majority. If you have an opinion, speak it. What I believe we we really have, most of the time, is a vocal minority trying to inflate their ranks with a non-existant silent majority. That's very well possible, but by the nature of the beast, no-one knows. Maybe I should have phrased it better: When there is a big discussion, I have sometimes a hard time knowing how representative given opinions are. Arguments are more important, but it *does* make a difference to me to know a bit better what side of the argument has the most people in favour. By no means to have that majority make up my mind, but it is one factor to consider. Voting on decisions is always disturbing to me: it always seems to be small steps away from the point where decisions are made based on uninformed popularity rather than technical merit. Yes, I think it's harmful to make decisions by popular vote. But just as that popcon exists to survey package usage, some different questions, technical, social or otherwise, lack any adequate form of survey on more people than just those who speak up on mailinglists -- after all, most people still only contribute to discussions if they have a new argument to make, at least, speaking for myself, I'll very rarely add a Me too!, if I don't have anything new to say. Having a poll that doesn't spam the lists provides a way to Me too!. I have to wonder how many people will vote for nvi bacause nvi is more like regular vi than vim. This is important even for an informal poll; a vote is useless if it's heavily skewed, whether it's a poll or a GR. [...] I think a poll might be a lot more useful if it was required that people had to offer, in a sentence or two, their rationale for their vote. The ideal situation would be to have a balanced number of top arguments in the ballot itself, IMHO. So that people don't need to read a full thread, but just can see, for example, the top 3 arguments of each side. Of course, it's very hard to make this balanced, and not skew the poll by providing opinionated summaries. (I wish people had to write a few paragraphs justifying their votes for government elections. Votes in essay format. One can dream ...) He. Thanks for your feedback. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ubuntu/Debian cooperation [was: Complaint about #debian operator]
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:54:11PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: If the ubuntu patch database is public, and the patches therein DFSG-free licensed, why don#t we establish an automatism which moves patches from the Ubuntu patch database to the Debian BTS? The Utnubu[1] project was started at Debconf to do exactly this. Unfortunately I haven't kept up at all with how they were doing in the past months, but please feel free to join them and work on such an automation. Also note that a few months ago, from the PTS links to Ubuntu patches were added. Suggestions for improvement on that are welcome at the qa.debian.org pseudo bug package. --Jeroen [1] http://utnubu.alioth.debian.org/ -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DPL-Team meeting minutes 2005-04-24
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 11:35:58AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Thanks to Andreas for the relatively fast distribution of minutes. Is there a public work programme for future meetings, which shows the topics to be raised or revisited and dates if known? That could be useful for DD oversight of the DPL-Team, if that is desired. When we have that programme, it'll be so decided in a meeting, and thus in the following minutes. At this moment, we simply do not have such a planning (yet). As noted before, the agenda for each meeting is supposed to be at least a few days in advance, but we're of course also still a bit exploring our meeting routine, the first meeting was for exampling also exploring how to exactly do so, how (and who) to chair the meeting, how minutes should look like, etc etc etc. I expect it to take a few weeks before there'll be a reasonably fixed routine of agenda, few days discussion, structured meeting and timely minutes, and then we also should be taking time to think about planning for when to discuss misceallaneous issues. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 11:15:57AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: The snapshot service is very valuable when it comes to checking older versions of packages. For example, it is a very, very good help for doing security work when older package versions need to be reviewed. Does that include the binary packages? I'd guess that binary packages are of lesser use because of library and other environmental changes, and it is mainly/exclusively the source packages that are of assistance in this matter. Is that correct? --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: snapshot.debian.net
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 01:12:43PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: I consider binary packages as extrem useful to check for dependency changes etc, That can be done by having an archive of packages files alone. or for fixing issues in some core packages where you need to take an older version for building a newer one. Would one really do that after 6 months, the current on-and-about keeping time for .deb's on ftp-master merkel? I seriously doubt that -- for past stable releases and revisions, ok, but for unstable/testing? Those are by definition development branches, and older .deb's loose relevance after some time, nobody has them anymore, and whatever effect they had is no longer supported anyway in not a single way. For source packages that's different indeed, but a source only snapshot.d.o would at this moment be about 100GB, which is *much* better handleble, and is viable for some .d.o machine to provide as 'debian-snapshot' and that will probably get at least a few mirrors without any Debian expenses spend on it. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Announcing project scud
Hi people, As you might have read in the platforms of Branden Robinson[1] and Andreas Schuldei[2], there is a small group of DD's that joined up with the intention to present a team during the DPL elections to later support the DPL with his work. This team, nicknamed Project Scud[3], started off in the last few weeks of 2004. Having had a very good experience being board member of a Study Association at my university, I wanted to project this way of leading upon Debian, of course adjusting for the specifics of Debian. Currently, the team consists other than myself of: - Andreas Schuldei - Branden Robinson - Steve Langasek - Enrico Zini - Bdale Garbee The idea is to be able to be able to achieve more, and do so with better decisions than any one individual could do. Due to the diversity of the team, but at the same time, the commitment to cooperate and discuss possible ways of achieving something in a contructive manner, we believe to be able to lead Debian well. Read the Having a DPL team will allow us to: and Implementation details: bits of Andreas' platform for a more detailed list of goals and details. It's already been asked whether Branden and Andreas will be giving the same answers to questions posed to them during the campaign period. As you can see from their platforms, they are not clone candidates; there is no central committee that has to bless their opinions before they express them. The developers participating in this group were chosen as much for their differences as for their similarities. Of course, the one similarity we *do* share is a desire to work for the betterment of the Debian project -- a desire that we know is also shared by almost all of the DPL candidates standing this year. An important aspect IMHO of a DPL, or any leader, is to be able to listen to opinions and arguments, and not be too proud to later change opinion if the arguments convince him to do so. I have faith in both Andreas and Branden to be able to do so, and we believe that this starts on -vote during the campaign period, where other members of this group are free to engage the candidates about issues of interest. This group is running with two candidates, in the event that either of the two turns out to win, this candidate will lead the team. Personally, I simply didn't yet make up my mind which one I prefer, it will depend on how the campaigning will go. For the record, I'm unlikely to announce my own ballot before voting has ended. We didn't announce it earlier, because that would be a false start campaigning in the DPL elections. If the team will be elected, I intend to work on a much more open way to assemble such a team, details still unknown of course, because then it isn't anymore the concept that is very new and needs to be campaigned for. I hope that we'll be able to provide debian with the leadership it can use. Thank you for reading along, --Jeroen [1] http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/platforms/branden [2] http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/platforms/andreas [3] In reference to the dog of Sid from toystory, actually this was just a working title initially -- we do acknowledge that the name has some unfortunate bad connotations -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mail forwarding in return for Debian donation
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 10:32:46PM +0100, Pete van der Spoel wrote: I can see where you're coming from, but I think that's a very pessimistic way of looking at it. Also, I'm not suggesting paying a thousand people a full salary. What about having a small financial reward for each release critical bug that is squashed? While Debian cannot do so for various reasons already pointed out in the thread, nobody stops anyone from paying someone to do any or a specific bugfix. Since bugfixing is hard to judge (done well vs. just a hacky patch remediating the issue but not really solving it), you'll probably need to specifically choose someone and something to fix. In fact, you 'hire' some developer for fixing your pet bug, something that is a key element to the open source business model. By specifically choosing someone to do a certain task, you don't have very strongly the disadvantage of people only attracted by the money, which would be a bad thing. Bounties have been announced for anyone doing a specific task in the past[1], but the key difference is that it is much more easily judgeable whether a certain bug is indeed present, then to judge whether a fix is good. --Jeroen [1] http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=5121 -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Re: http://forums.debian.net in beta
First, apologies for the delay in replying. On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 04:08:19PM -0400, Intense Red wrote: Secondly, Jeroen mentioned: The legality of this is doubtful, but the claim is made, and I'm not very comfortable with it. Why would the legality of this be doubtful? If there is a problem with the legality of this, I'd like to know about it. Having posted in the mentioned thread, I also noticed that it is made very clear to posters they post under the GFDL, and retract my statement about legal issues with it -- it's to my opinion indeed sufficiently clear one is posting under the GFDL. of the site is due to the postnuke and phpbb projects (the latter having their own copyright notices being removed from the site). The forum I use is a PostNuke module called phpBB_14. It is a heavily modified fork of the old phpBB version 1.4 maintained by a team based in Germany. It displays no copyright notice that I know of. Credit for the forum is displayed on various pages and you can see those credits on debianHELP (see 2/3 of the way down http://www.debianhelp.org/modules.php?op=modloadname=phpBB_14file=index for one example). I consider allegations of not acknowledging software authors to be fairly serious. For the various PostNuke modules I use you can easily reference them at http://www.debianhelp.org/index.php?module=Credits, the standard credit URL for a PostNuke site. In the future, please do some checking before making such claims. I apologize again, I was not aware of this early fork of phpBB and the history of it, and the site referenced from debianhelp was some weird German site. By the way, there is no problem in the current content being GFDL, in my opinion, since the GFDL gives _more_ rights to all readers than they would have if the forum contents were not under the GFDL. One should keep in mind that usually on mailinglists and forums, no copyright arrangements are made, and thus all posts are copyrighted by their respective authors, and nobody has the right to reproduce them outside of the regular copyright law arrangements regarding fair quoting and the like. Currently debianhelp _forces_ posters to supply their comments under the GFDL, but it is of course free to any author to dual-license their text under both the GFDL and, let's say, the GPL. I see no legal issues in dropping the requirement to license any future contribution under the GFDL, and to merge efforts. Note that on forums.debian.net there is also some text licensed under the GFDL, and since this provides extra rights to readers, rather than restricting the rights they have, I have no objection to that. By the way, as an interesting point, from a legal point of view, the GFDL would make it perfectly legal and in the spirit of the GFDL itself to just copy all content to forums.debian.net, provided possibly that I make sure to make clear that the texts copied are GFDL'd. Note that I do not consider such copying without agreement from the debianhelp admin an option for reasons of common courtesy, 'rude' would be the least way to call such an action. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Re: http://forums.debian.net in beta
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 10:40:34PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: Avoid debianHELP for now. It's too heavy on the militant and too lax on the FREE. Nothing submitted to the site is free software or can form part of free software. So much for we're strong believers in the concept of free software. As I mailed in my reply to the debianHELP admin, nothing posted to any debian-mailinglist is by default elegible for inclusion in free software either, but just as with all content on debianHELP, all can be made part of free software iff the author agrees (and (dual or not)-licenses the content under a DFSG-free license). --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Re: http://forums.debian.net in beta
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 03:02:54AM +0100, Moray Allan wrote:
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 03:00 +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
Since quite some people like webforums for discussion and support, and
also a certain other GNU/Linux distribution has quite succesful
webforums, I decided to try providing a webforum for the Debian
community too.
How does this relate/compare to existing Debian web forums such as those
on the debianHELP site? (I don't use web forums myself, but it would be
good to know where to point any users who ask about them.)
forums.debian.net is unrelated and unaffiliated. There are indeed
multiple webforums out there for Debian, of varying popularity. AFAICS,
the debianHELP one[1] is the most popular, being started about two years
ago and about 35 messages per day on average. There isn't one sort-of
canonical forum though.
forums.debian.net is currently nearly-empty, it is yet to gain momentum.
It is without anything else than its 'core business', webforums. I must
admit that I wasn't aware of the debianHELP one, google for
debian+forum{,s} didn't give it in the first few pages.
Starting forums.debian.net didn't take much more time than an 'apt-get
install phpbb2' takes, I see I failed to properly search for other
initiatives already. debianplaza.net[2] is scratching the same itch[3],
I've yet to decide what to do (I'll mail them).
--Jeroen
[1] http://www.debianhelp.org/modules.php?op=modloadname=phpBB_14file=index
[2] http://forums.debianplaza.net/
[3] http://forums.debianplaza.net/viewtopic.php?t=6
--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Re: http://forums.debian.net in beta
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 11:55:41AM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: * Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-09-09 12:47]: multiple webforums out there for Debian, of varying popularity. AFAICS, the debianHELP one[1] is the most popular, being started about two years ... forums.debian.net is currently nearly-empty, it is yet to gain momentum. Well, we could just point forums.debian.net to debianHELP... Possible, but would not be my preference for a few reasons: - by means of their footer, they claim that all comments and messages are GFDL'd. The legality of this is doubtful, but the claim is made, and I'm not very comfortable with it. They also say that everything else is copyright Golgotha Systems, while obviously a significant part of the site is due to the postnuke and phpbb projects (the latter having their own copyright notices being removed from the site). - It's a meta-site, with forum being part of it, somewhat obscured. And I don't like their primary-colour colour-scheme :) - It has commercial banners on all pages, for the hosting company, and for some news site Either way, I'm in no way intending to hostage forums.debian.net, so if in the end this is decided, then it'll be so, of course. Starting forums.debian.net didn't take much more time than an 'apt-get install phpbb2' takes, I see I failed to properly search for other It's not about installing the software but getting a community established around the forum. If debianHELP has done that already, maybe you should just work with them. (Just giving random good advice; I don't use forums and don't know how good debianHELP or others are.) I wasn't clear in my wording, the quoted sentence was the a lame excuse for my neglect to do research for 'prior art', of course I do realize what the hard part is of a webforum, or in general, any communication channel. All I wanted to say with that sentence is that it wasn't intentional to create yet-another-debian-forum. As said above, I have reservations with the DebianHELP one, and the 'Debian Community' one[1] uses commercial webforum software[2]. I'll be mailing around a bit to seek input from other Debian-related forums, since I still feel there is an itch to scratch, but it's indeed much better to help and/or merge existing efforts. Thanks for your input, --Jeroen [1] http://www.design2i.com/debian/ [2] Invision Power Board[3], and is probably even violating license since [trial version] Permanent use of the software requires purchasing the license.[4] [3] http://www.invisionboard.com/ [4] http://www.invisionboard.com/?license -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
http://forums.debian.net in beta
Hi all, Since quite some people like webforums for discussion and support, and also a certain other GNU/Linux distribution has quite succesful webforums, I decided to try providing a webforum for the Debian community too. So, here it is, and lets see whether (part of) the Debian user community also likes it. It's currently still in beta, so please direct any improvement suggestions and problem reports to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: http://forums.debian.net is not an official Debian service, just like any *.debian.net isn't. It's a service provided by myself on my own, personal initiative, and not sanctionized by the Debian Project. Have Fun! --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Re: Section gnustep, was: http://packages.debian.org/unstable/
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 08:57:46AM +0100, G?rkan Seng?n wrote: I believe we need a new section called gnustep, just like we have one for gnome and kde. I think this is a good idea. Would it start by being populated with anything depending on gnustep*, or did I not think that through? What packages would that give? Yep, this would also help me have less warnings in the gnustep-meta packages ( http://www.linuks.mine.nu/i_debian/meta-gnustep/ ), can we change lintian like this: If all agree that we add 'gnustep' to the section. I think lintian package should be updated by adding 'gnustep' to: lintian source testset/info_tags.non-us, line 28 checks/common_data.pm, line 21 checks/fields.desc, line 172 This will happen automatically (well, sort of) by the lintian maintainers when policy gets changed (and not earlier than that). On topic: I don't really think a section for this few packages is worth it. Package count (binary, unstable of two days ago, without contrib and non-free) is below, and it shows that even the smallest section has nearly 300 packages. Maybe there are better splits to imagine (seperate compilers from devel? Client networking stuff from net (as opposed to server networking stuff)?) --Jeroen shells292 news 327 embedded 383 electronics 515 oldlibs 647 comm 658 tex 700 hamradio 734 otherosfs 845 base 890 science 921 doc 1037 kde 1155 editors 1314 math 1429 misc 2049 mail 2233 perl 2482 gnome2606 graphics 2765 text 2914 interpreters 3081 web 3233 python 3252 sound3280 admin3765 games4724 x11 5217 utils5333 devel7002 net 8941 libdevel11895 libs13390 --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Re: Section gnustep, was: http://packages.debian.org/unstable/
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 11:54:38AM +0100, G?rkan Seng?n wrote: Package count (binary, unstable of two days ago, without contrib and non-free) is below, and it shows that even the smallest section has nearly 300 packages. Nice try butc can you tell me how you got to that numbers, exactly? apt-cache search gnome | wc -l gave me 656 and kde gave me 556 (debian gnu/linux, sid today on powerpc) I fucked up: the count was across all archs, so binary any packages are counted like 9 times. This invalidates my argument, although 47 (or 90 as you estimate) packages with 'gnustep' in the description (apt-cache search gnustep|wc -l) is still less than 263 (gnome) or 212 (kde) packages, it isn't unlike the smaller sections that already exist. However Debian does not have 19 packages. Same fuckup, Debian has, but not if you only consider packages applicable to one arch. And here an unfucked package count: [EMAIL PROTECTED] grep -h ^Section: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.nl.debian.org_debian_dists_sid_*Packages|sed 's/Section: //;s#[a-z-]*/##'|sort|uniq -c | sort -n 27 shells 46 news 53 embedded 57 electronics 71 hamradio 75 comm 101 oldlibs 119 science 122 otherosfs 138 base 152 tex 197 math 214 editors 231 kde 279 gnome 299 mail 340 graphics 375 sound 384 misc 419 interpreters 494 python 527 text 623 games 634 admin 645 perl 661 x11 665 utils 678 web 917 doc 1010 net 1118 libdevel 1209 devel 1417 libs [EMAIL PROTECTED] --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Change www.debian.org (Was: Re: security.debian.org down?)
On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 12:32:43PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 12:05:32PM +0100, Stephan Austerm?hle wrote: ... debian-news should be subscribed by everybody remotely interested in Debian. Yes, but quite some people simply don't. Hard to change. Right, they access www.debian.org and try to find a status note. It can't be that difficult to put a note on the webserver manually even without tool support. The problem is that we don't have 'the' webserver. We have a couple of dozen mirrors, running www.debian.org in a dozen languages. So manually changing 'the' www.debian.org does not help at all, as all the other servers will not get that information. [EMAIL PROTECTED] host www.debian.org www.debian.org has address 192.25.206.10 [EMAIL PROTECTED] host 192.25.206.10 10.206.25.192.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer gluck.debian.org. [EMAIL PROTECTED] I guess most people not knowing a lot about Debian and how it provides news etc, and who usually don't visit Debian webpages and read mailinglists, will check out www.debian.org. So it only needs someone with www-data (or whatever) access to gluck to change www.debian.org, the site MOST people will be looking at. Indeed, not everyone, mirrors are not updated, but most people are smart enough if something is not responding to check the authoritive site, especially just before they mail, and that happens to be www.debian.org (and it is quite logical to think so). And if they don't they will get a feeling of 'oops, I'm stupid' if they are pointed to www.debian.org, rather than a ML archive, in which case they thing `oh, I'd never have found that, good I asked'. The primary source for information today is a web server, not a mailinglist! Not for the Debian project, sorry. Where is that stated? But anyway, fixing www.debian.org will IMHO prevent quite some questions, despite everything. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl pgpPbKvxItoAk.pgp Description: PGP signature
