Re: Question regarding to the status of Debian 11 (bullseye) AMIs

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 10:41:57PM +, yu, bing wrote:
> Hi Debian Team,
> 
> This is Bing Yu, a software engineer from NetApp. I am working on a project 
> using Debian 11 and I realised our official Debian 11 (bullseye) AMIs for 
> Amazon EC2 hasn’t been updated since Oct 2023 
> https://wiki.debian.org/Cloud/AmazonEC2Image/Bullseye
> 
> Debian community used maintained this AMI more frequently but that doesn’t 
> seem to be the case anymore. Consider Debian 11 is still active version of 
> Debian, do we still expect an update on Debian 11 (bullseye) AMIs for Amazon 
> EC2 coming soon?
> 

Hi Bing,

I'd expect an update with the next point release - probably this coming
weekend 10/11 February. Bullseye is the former stable release and is
released in synchrony with the current Debian 12 - but every *other* point
release. This means that it's released roughly every 4-5 months.

The release team are planning 11.9 for February and, probably, another
release just before it drops from Debian security support to Long Term
Support status on 1st July 2024. 

As ever, Debian is ready when its ready - so dates can slip.

Andy
(amaca...@debian.org)

Working with the Debian images team who coordinate with the Release Team.
> Thanks very much,
> 
> Bing

Re: Question about contributing to debian financially.

[Paul Wise]

On Wed, 2022-11-16 at 08:35 -0500, Zeke Williams wrote:

> I have an additional question for if I were to hire someone personally
> to maintain certain debian packages. What happens with the security
> team if a package has no maintainer and a security vulnerability is
> found? Does the security team recompile the package with the patch
> even if there is no maintainer? Is it more difficult to get involved
> with the security team or maintainers team?

Anyone can contribute security updates to Debian.

The security team do a lot of the work on that and they work on any
package in Debian. They do not fix every security issue, some minor
issues are left either without fixes or for someone else, usually the
package maintainer.

Joining the security team can only happen after one is already a Debian
member and presumably after the person has been contributing security
fixes for some time without being part of the team yet.

If someone wants to get involved in improving Debian security, please
have them take a look at our pages about Debian and security support:

https://www.debian.org/security/
https://www.debian.org/security/faq
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Security
https://security-team.debian.org/
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/data/report
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.en.html#bug-security

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Question about contributing to debian financially.

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 08:35:01AM -0500, Zeke Williams wrote:

I have an additional question for if I were to hire someone personally
to maintain certain debian packages. What happens with the security
team if a package has no maintainer and a security vulnerability is
found? Does the security team recompile the package with the patch
even if there is no maintainer?


Yes.


Is it more difficult to get involved with the security team or maintainers team?


If by "getting involved" you mean joining, as oppose to interacting
with, the security team is much more difficult than "maintainers team"
which I take to mean any package maintainer.

--
Please do not CC me for listmail.

  Jonathan Dowland
✎j...@debian.org
   https://jmtd.net

Re: Question about contributing to debian financially.

[Zeke Williams]

I have an additional question for if I were to hire someone personally
to maintain certain debian packages. What happens with the security
team if a package has no maintainer and a security vulnerability is
found? Does the security team recompile the package with the patch
even if there is no maintainer? Is it more difficult to get involved
with the security team or maintainers team?

On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 6:40 PM Paul Wise  wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2022-11-15 at 12:22 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
>
> > Debian is defined –and proud– to be a volunteer-based project,
> > that is, we don't hire and have never hired people to do our work,
> > technical or otherwise.
>
> The only exception thus far has been Outreachy internships.
>
> > If you donate funds to Debian, we will most likely use them in
> > hardware for the different project activities, hosting and
> > connectivity, or travels for Debian conferences / miniconferences.
>
> https://www.debian.org/donations
>
> > If what you want to do is to ensure a given area of the project is
> > well maintained, you can hire Debian Developers or Maintainers, and
> > pay them to improve the areas you feel to be more important.
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-jobs/
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-consultants/
> https://www.debian.org/consultants/
> https://www.fossjobs.net/
> https://github.com/fossjobs/fossjobs/wiki/resources
>
> > There are many cases of individuals and compaines donating to Debian
> > in both ways; perhaps the most visible is the Freexian's "Long Term
> > Support" for Debian releases.
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/LTS
> https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Funding
> https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Team
>
> Freexian is also funding general Debian development:
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/grow-your-ideas
> https://freexian-team.pages.debian.net/project-funding/
> https://salsa.debian.org/freexian-team/project-funding
>
> --
> bye,
> pabs
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Re: Question about contributing to debian financially.

[Paul Wise]

On Tue, 2022-11-15 at 12:22 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:

> Debian is defined –and proud– to be a volunteer-based project,
> that is, we don't hire and have never hired people to do our work,
> technical or otherwise.

The only exception thus far has been Outreachy internships.

> If you donate funds to Debian, we will most likely use them in
> hardware for the different project activities, hosting and
> connectivity, or travels for Debian conferences / miniconferences.

https://www.debian.org/donations

> If what you want to do is to ensure a given area of the project is
> well maintained, you can hire Debian Developers or Maintainers, and
> pay them to improve the areas you feel to be more important.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-jobs/
https://lists.debian.org/debian-consultants/
https://www.debian.org/consultants/
https://www.fossjobs.net/
https://github.com/fossjobs/fossjobs/wiki/resources

> There are many cases of individuals and compaines donating to Debian
> in both ways; perhaps the most visible is the Freexian's "Long Term
> Support" for Debian releases.

https://wiki.debian.org/LTS
https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Funding
https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Team

Freexian is also funding general Debian development:

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/grow-your-ideas
https://freexian-team.pages.debian.net/project-funding/
https://salsa.debian.org/freexian-team/project-funding

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Question about contributing to debian financially.

[Gunnar Wolf]

Hello Zeke,

Zeke Williams dijo [Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 08:36:15AM -0500]:
> I'm considering in the future, funding the debian project financially.
> More specifically, helping fund hiring package maintainers for
> orphaned packages as well as individuals who can maintain the security
> patches. How can I help? Or rather, how would I be able to help if I
> wanted to help in the future?

First and foremost, thanks for your interest in helping Debian!

Debian is defined –and proud– to be a volunteer-based project, that
is, we don't hire and have never hired people to do our work,
technical or otherwise. If you donate funds to Debian, we will most
likely use them in hardware for the different project activities,
hosting and connectivity, or travels for Debian conferences /
miniconferences.

If what you want to do is to ensure a given area of the project is
well maintained, you can hire Debian Developers or Maintainers, and
pay them to improve the areas you feel to be more important.

There are many cases of individuals and compaines donating to Debian
in both ways; perhaps the most visible is the Freexian's "Long Term
Support" for Debian releases.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: question with the Debian Project

[Paul Wise]

On Fri, 2022-07-29 at 17:13 +0800, 桑猛 wrote:

>  Hello debian,I am a user of debian system and belong to the company
> Loongson Zhongke. We have our own loongarch architecture.

Please check out our documentation on how to create new Debian ports,
it has the steps you will need to get LoongArch supported by Debian
and there is a wiki page for the status of loongarch64 in Debian.

https://wiki.debian.org/PortsDocs/New
https://wiki.debian.org/LoongArch
https://wiki.debian.org/Ports/loongarch64

To update the wiki pages, please register an account and click edit.

> Now we want to adapt our loongarch architecture based on debian12 or
> debian13. We would like to get the version of some packages on debian
> 12 and Debian 13 to help us choose which version to use as our next
> system version.

According to the documentation above, new official ports are based
solely on Debian unstable/sid, which is constantly being updated with
new versions daily, at least until the freeze for bookworm in 2023.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2022/03/msg8.html
https://release.debian.org/#release-dates

Probably there isn't enough time before the freeze to include
loongarch64 within the official Debian ports, so the first official
Debian release that could include loongarch64 would be 13 (trixie).

If you are talking about an unofficial loongarch64 port available
outside of Debian, then you should base your next release of the port
on the next available release of Debian, which is 12 (bookworm) and is
constantly being updated with new versions, at least until the freeze.

Please note that there is talk of a tier system for Debian ports and
that work is likely to change some of the new port process details.

https://gobby.debian.org/export/debconf22/bof/tier-architecture-system
https://debconf22.debconf.org/talks/47-investigating-a-tier-system-for-release-architectures/

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: question with the Debian Project

[Steffen Moeller]

Am 29.07.2022 um 12:09 schrieb Andrey Rahmatullin:

On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 05:13:38PM +0800, 桑猛 wrote:

Hello debian,I am a user of debian system and belong to the company Loongson 
Zhongke. We have our own loongarch architecture. Now we want to adapt our 
loongarch architecture based on debian12 or debian13.

We would like to get the version of some packages on debian 12 and Debian 13 to 
help us choose which version to use as our next system version.

I don't think anyone can say what versions will trixie contain, apart from
a very small number of projects with fixed release schedules. On the other
hand, I don't think you would care about versions that are not released
yet and so you know nothing about them anyway.
As for bookworm, some people responsible may be able to give estimations
but the freeze is in 6 months so many versions are not known either. You
can check the current versions in testing using tracker.debian.org,
packages.debian.org, rmadison or apt.


Hm. These packages are mostly core packages from how I interpret them.
And https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loongson will turn into another flavor
of MIPS as a separate architecture if I get this right. So, just
guessing, but I sense that the challenge is to prepare all those core
packages for a brand new architecture that yet nobody has access to.

Concerning the question what distribution to target - I propose sid. And
whenever the packages have seen all the updates/changes required to run
on MIPS-Loongarch then these will soon also be in testing, which with a
bit of luck is then Bookworm, still. With core packages being the first
that are to be frozen for the release, this all needs to happen within
the next 6 months. No idea about how realistic that is. Also, the
Loongarch-motivated changes should go to upstream, not into debian/patches.

I suggest to organize porter boxes and build demons, and maybe spread a
few machines to key individuals, whoever that may be. Concerning the
exact version of the core packages, because of your special hardware you
likely need a respective collaboration with the Debian developers
anyway. Just work with them to get the packages you need updated to the
version that you need.

Debian has this concept of Sprints, see https://wiki.debian.org/Sprints
. It may be fruitful to prepare for an intense extended weekend together
to get this going.

Best wishes,
Steffen 

Re: question with the Debian Project

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 05:13:38PM +0800, 桑猛 wrote:
> Hello debian,I am a user of debian system and belong to the company Loongson 
> Zhongke. We have our own loongarch architecture. Now we want to adapt our 
> loongarch architecture based on debian12 or debian13.
> 
> We would like to get the version of some packages on debian 12 and Debian 13 
> to help us choose which version to use as our next system version.
I don't think anyone can say what versions will trixie contain, apart from
a very small number of projects with fixed release schedules. On the other
hand, I don't think you would care about versions that are not released
yet and so you know nothing about them anyway.
As for bookworm, some people responsible may be able to give estimations
but the freeze is in 6 months so many versions are not known either. You
can check the current versions in testing using tracker.debian.org,
packages.debian.org, rmadison or apt.

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: question with the Debian Project

[Yadd]

On 29/07/2022 11:13, 桑猛 wrote:
Hello debian,I am a user of debian system and belong to the company 
Loongson Zhongke. We have our own loongarch architecture. Now we want to 
adapt our loongarch architecture based on debian12 or debian13.


We would like to get the *version of some packages* on debian 12 and 
Debian 13 to help us choose which version to use as our next system version.


The packages are as follows(Some packages can be obtained from public 
information):


Hi,

Debian 12 is planed around 2023 and Debian 13 around 2025!

Package versions for Debian 12 can change until release, but you can 
still see current versions of these packages using 
https://packages.debian.org (search packages in "testing" version)


Cheers,
Yadd

package name 	debian12（ Bookworm） package version 	debian13（Trixie） 
package version

kernel  5.18.0  
gcc 11.3
glibc   2.33-8  
binutils2.38.90.20220713-2  
libffi  3.4.2-4 
libunwind   
llvm
golang  
rustc   
luajit  
grub2   2.06-3  
systemd 251.2-7 
qtwebengine 
openssl 3.0.4   
Qt  
gzip1.12-1  
zlib1:1.2.11.dfsg-4 
libjpeg 
linpng  16_1.6.37   
libpixman   
skia
cairo   
ffmpeg  
libx264 
python  3_3.10.5-3  
perl5.34.0-5
.net
openjdk 
qemu
libvirt 


can i get your help?

Re: Question regarding wallpapers

[Sergio Moraes]

Hi F.X. Patterson

Would this happen to be what you're looking for?
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianArt/Themes

Thank you

*--Sergio Moraes*
*Data Management Analyst*
Phone: (734) 262-9830


On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 1:46 PM F.X. Patterson 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I wasn't sure where else to email this to since I couldn't find contact
> info for the artwork group. Would Debian happen to have a comprehensive
> list of all the default wallpapers they've used over the years? (something
> like https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Wallpapers)
> I've reached dead ends trying to find earlier wallpapers as they don't
> seem to exist on the artwork site.
>
> If you could get it to me in one file I'd really appreciate it.
>
> Thanks,
> F.X. Patterson
>
>
> Sent with ProtonMail  Secure Email.
>
>

Re: Question

[Jonathan Carter]

Hi Nyle

On 2021/02/04 09:00, Nyle Davis wrote:
> Sirs;

Debian contributors are made up of a large variety of people and we try
to use inclusive language as far as possible.

> I was using Kubuntu 14.04 LTS which had what I called "Super Windows"
> where any window could be nested within any other window and be shown
> by "Super Tabs", such as with browser tabs.  This existed in 14.04 but
> is not available in later visions.  I liked this capability so am
> searching for it.  I started by asking KDE, the answer was "Not us!",
> Then I asked Ubuntu/Canonical again the answer was
> "Not us!",  They actually referred me to you, so did this "Super
> Windows" originate with Debian?
> 
> If so is it a separate installable package?

Sounds very unlikely, we don't like to carry big patches, and would
rather submit changes like that upstream where they belong. Might have
been a 3rd party plugin that Kubuntu included at the time, your best bet
might be to install Kubuntu 14.04 somewhere and do some diving.

-Jonathan

Re: question - contact to web dev of debian website

[Louis-Philippe Véronneau]

Hi George,

You can reach the web team on their mailing list at
debian-...@lists.debian.org or on IRC on the #debian-www channel, on OFTC.

If you want to have a look at the current code for debian.org, it's
hosted here [1].

Cheers,

[1]: https://salsa.debian.org/webmaster-team/webwml

-- 
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Louis-Philippe Véronneau
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋   po...@debian.org / veronneau.org
  ⠈⠳⣄
On 2020-12-19 08 h 55, George Suba wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> I did read somewhere on net about new site and since then (today) I
> visited the debian.org site. I think I can help with it or at least I
> could provide some valuable directions.
> 
> ( I use bash, responsive frameworks like bootstrap, apache, pure html,
> markdown and git )
> 
> - Can someone point me to the right contact/s to web dev team please?
> many thanks.
> 



OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: question - contact to web dev of debian website

[Calum McConnell]

On Sat, 2020-12-19 at 13:55 +, George Suba wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> I did read somewhere on net about new site and since then (today) I 
> visited the debian.org site. I think I can help with it or at least I 
> could provide some valuable directions.
> 
> ( I use bash, responsive frameworks like bootstrap, apache, pure html, 
> markdown and git )
> 
> - Can someone point me to the right contact/s to web dev team please? 
> many thanks.

The mailing list for web development is debian-...@lists.debian.org .  The
site is coded in WML, the Website Meta Language, which is a static site
generator that's higher-level than raw HTML or SSI, but lower-level than,
say, Jekyll.  You can find the git sources at
g...@salsa.debian.org:webmaster-team/webwml.git 

Calum


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Question about repositories

[Paul Wise]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 1:29 PM negin jafari wrote:

> I am a university Student trying to learn a lot of things about Debian.

As a university student, you might be interested in participating in
Debian through the Google Summer of Code or Outreachy paid mentorship
programs.

https://www.outreachy.org/
https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/
https://wiki.debian.org/Outreachy
https://wiki.debian.org/SummerOfCode
https://wiki.debian.org/Mentoring

The intro section on our website might be helpful with understanding Debian:

https://www.debian.org/intro/

Our page of diagrams, in particular the "Understanding Debian"
infographic, will probably also be useful to you for understanding
Debian.

https://wiki.debian.org/Diagrams
http://cfnarede.com.br/infographic-of-debian/
https://github.com/filhocf/infographics/raw/master/debian/infographic_debian.svg

While you are learning about Debian, if you come across unfamiliar
terms, our Glossary may be helpful to you:

https://wiki.debian.org/Glossary

Other folks have already answered your questions, but I'll give
another perspective on them.

> Is there only one repository for Debian or are there more ? What are their 
> links?

There is one main repository that contains most of our packages, split
up into 3 components (main, contrib, non-free) and multiple releases
(experimental, unstable, testing, stable, oldstable). In addition to
our main repository, we split out debug symbols packages into a
separate repository, we have a separate repository for security
updates and we have a separate repository for unofficial ports. All
these repositories are available from the Debian package CDN. The main
repository is also synced to many mirror servers and the unofficial
ports are synced to a couple of mirrors.

https://www.debian.org/intro/free
https://www.debian.org/releases/
https://wiki.debian.org/AutomaticDebugPackages
https://www.debian.org/security/
https://www.debian.org/ports/
https://www.ports.debian.org/
https://deb.debian.org/
https://www.debian.org/mirror/
https://www.ports.debian.org/mirrors

> Is there any security repository or source repositories ? What are their 
> links?

In addition to the security/source repositories already linked by
others, we have a database of security information, where you can look
up security issues by CVE number, Debian source package name or Debian
release name.

https://security-tracker.debian.org/

The Debian package tracker service might also be useful to you:

https://tracker.debian.org/

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Re: Question about repositories

[tomas]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 04:52:34PM +0330, negin jafari wrote:
> Dear sir or madam,
> 
> I am a university Student trying to learn a lot of things about Debian.
> I searched all the website about list of repositories but I could only find 
> the link below :
> http://ftp.acc.umu.se/debian/ 
> Is there only one repository for Debian or are there more ? What are their 
> links?
> Is there any security repository or source repositories ? What are their 
> links?
> I really need to know this and I’d  be really thankful for your answer.

There are several possibilities to aproach that, depending on your
needs. I will list two of them:

1. You know which package you are interested in
===

Each package has its own repository. Those are not necessarily
git, although this seems to be the most common option these
days. Note that git wasn't even invented when Debian started!

You'll find the packages via

  https://packages.debian.org/

For example, let's assume you are interested in "emacs25": you
search from the above page and find a couple of hits (in my case
three: one for stretch, one for buster, one for buster-updates.

Let's go with the "buster" one. That would be the URL

  https://packages.debian.org/buster/emacs25

To the right, you see a small pane "Links for emacs25"; below that
there's a section "Debian Resources". Go to the link "developer
information". This leads you to

  https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/emacs

There, under the section "general", there's an entry "VCS" [1];
in our case this leads to

  https://salsa.debian.org/rlb/deb-emacs

2. You are looking for something in the sources
===

There is an unified view on all the package sources
at

  https://sources.debian.org/

There you can either search by package name or do a full text
search on the source.

Let's assume you are looking for something called "make_incremental_updates":
you enter that into the corresponding box above and hit "Search Code",
and you are led to

  https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=make_incremental_updates

You'll get the pieces of source code matching that query, listing
packages and other info.

Enjoy

[1] This means "version control system"

 - tomás


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question about repositories

[Xavier]

Le 23/10/2020 à 15:22, negin jafari a écrit :
> Dear sir or madam,
> 
> I am a university Student trying to learn a lot of things about Debian.
> I searched all the website about list of repositories but I could only
> find the link below :
> http://ftp.acc.umu.se/debian/
> Is there only one repository for Debian or are there more ? What are
> their links?

Hi,

See https://www.debian.org/mirror/list (both sources and binaries)

> Is there any security repository or source repositories ? What are their
> links?

http://security.debian.org/debian-security/ (both sources and binaries)

> I really need to know this and I’d  be really thankful for your answer.
> Best regards
> 
> Negin jafari

Cheers,
Xavier

Re: Question to all: Outreach

[Holger Levsen]

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 07:01:35PM +0800, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:26 PM Daniel Lange  wrote:
> [...]
> > As Debian can afford paying for its interns itself, we do.
> This looks bad to me. Should Debian pay directly to its contributors?
 
Indeed this is a good question, which I'd also answer with 'no' for the
general, continious cases. But Outreachy is about getting people involved,
supporting them to get started, once, and aimed at people who for various
reasons have more difficulties in our societies than our average members.

These two things make this worthwhile and doable to me.


-- 
cheers,
Holger

---
   holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
   PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C

In Europe there are people prosecuted by courts because they saved other people
from drowning in the  Mediterranean Sea.  That is almost as absurd  as if there
were people being prosecuted because they save humans from drowning in the sea.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Question to all: Outreach

[Shengjing Zhu]

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 8:12 PM Ulrike Uhlig  wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> On 18.03.20 12:01, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:26 PM Daniel Lange  wrote:
> > [...]
> >> As Debian can afford paying for its interns itself, we do.
> >
> > This looks bad to me. Should Debian pay directly to its contributors?
> > PS, IMO it's totally fine that other parties to pay Debian
> > contributors, like the LTS program.
>
> Why not?
>
> The money comes from people and companies who explicitly support Debian
> to do this work, just like the work on LTS.
>
> This investment is aiming at making Debian a more diverse community,
> which it currently isn't (1010 DDs, out of which less than 30, last time
> I counted, are female, trans, inter, queer aka. FTIQ*).
> Research has shown [1] that this is due to a variety of reasons, one of
> which is the lack of free time or financial support and free time for
> these people.
>
> We are talking about a total payment of 5000 USD (minus taxes for the
> contributors according to their country's tax law) per intern. This
> money is not received for nothing but for doing three months of
> full-time work that advances a variety of projects in Debian.
>
> After which interns generally continue to contribute for free, if the
> mentoring program hasn't been horribly bad at supporting them to do so.
>

Just to clarify, I appreciate all the mentoring/diverse works.

If Outreachy program is same as GSoC, which is paid by a company, I
have no doubt about it.

I only concerns that Debian pays _directly_.

-- 
Shengjing Zhu

Re: Question to all: Outreach

[Ulrike Uhlig]

Hello!

On 18.03.20 12:01, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:26 PM Daniel Lange  wrote:
> [...]
>> As Debian can afford paying for its interns itself, we do.
> 
> This looks bad to me. Should Debian pay directly to its contributors?
> PS, IMO it's totally fine that other parties to pay Debian
> contributors, like the LTS program.

Why not?

The money comes from people and companies who explicitly support Debian
to do this work, just like the work on LTS.

This investment is aiming at making Debian a more diverse community,
which it currently isn't (1010 DDs, out of which less than 30, last time
I counted, are female, trans, inter, queer aka. FTIQ*).
Research has shown [1] that this is due to a variety of reasons, one of
which is the lack of free time or financial support and free time for
these people.

We are talking about a total payment of 5000 USD (minus taxes for the
contributors according to their country's tax law) per intern. This
money is not received for nothing but for doing three months of
full-time work that advances a variety of projects in Debian.

After which interns generally continue to contribute for free, if the
mentoring program hasn't been horribly bad at supporting them to do so.

Ulrike

[1]
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264799720_FLOSSPOLS_Deliverable_D_16_Gender_Integrated_Report_of_Findings

Re: Question to all: Outreach

[Shengjing Zhu]

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:26 PM Daniel Lange  wrote:
[...]
> As Debian can afford paying for its interns itself, we do.

This looks bad to me. Should Debian pay directly to its contributors?
PS, IMO it's totally fine that other parties to pay Debian
contributors, like the LTS program.

-- 
Shengjing Zhu

Re: Question to all: Outreach

[Daniel Lange]

Hi 朱晟菁,

Am 18.03.20 um 09:43 schrieb Shengjing Zhu:

It's still not clear to me the difference between GSoC and Outreachy program.


GSoC is a Google program:
 https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/

Outreachy is a SFC program (originally founded at GNOME):
 https://www.outreachy.org

Both are unrelated except for Outreachy not accepting interns that have 
already had a GSoC assignment and Debian choosing to run them both via 
the Debian Outreach team, cf. https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Outreach .



IIUC, GSoC interns are paid by Google, which I appreciate their generosity.


Correct.


But who pays Outreachy interns? Is this the same that some companies
pay for it? like the companies logo on https://www.outreachy.org/.
However I'm confused that Debian is listed as sponsor on
https://www.outreachy.org. Why Debian sponsors other programs while
Debian needs others' sponsors?


Outreachy internships can be paid for by the sponsoring organization 
that also hosts the interns (i.e. Debian), by other organizations paying 
for specific assignments (i.e. the United Nations) or by sourcing from 
Outreachy's general fund.

As Debian can afford paying for its interns itself, we do.

Other organizations cannot and they are partially supported from our 
"share" that Outreachy.org takes ($500 per intern)* and donations that 
Outreachy.org gets awarded by other donors for granting internships 
and/or supporting its own charitable mission.

See https://www.outreachy.org/sponsor/ for details.

* this also pays for the administrative work Outreachy.org
staff are doing for the projects, managing the internships

Kind regards,
Daniel

Re: Question to all: Outreach

[Shengjing Zhu]

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 5:17 AM Hector Oron  wrote:
[...]
> > There are many people in Debian who were GSoC students and are active
> > Debian contributors, DMs, DDs. In which way does Outreachy differ from
> > GSoC from a Debian point of view - besides the fact that it explicitly
> > encourages people from underrepresented communities and non-students?
>

It's still not clear to me the difference between GSoC and Outreachy program.
IIUC, GSoC interns are paid by Google, which I appreciate their generosity.
But who pays Outreachy interns? Is this the same that some companies
pay for it? like the companies logo on https://www.outreachy.org/.
However I'm confused that Debian is listed as sponsor on
https://www.outreachy.org. Why Debian sponsors other programs while
Debian needs others' sponsors?

-- 
Shengjing Zhu

Re: Question to all: Outreach

[Hector Oron]

[Moving to debian-project from debian-vote if your intend is to
discuss on the topic]

Missatge de Ulrike Uhlig  del dia dt., 17 de març
2020 a les 21:46:

> (I have no idea if I am allowed to reply to this, or if only DPL
> candidates are supposed to reply. Hence forgive me if I'm overstepping a
> boundary here. Please tell me if that is the case by the way.)

> > I have been trying to measure the return from such program but looking
> > at their mailing list for information,
> >   https://lists.debian.org/debian-outreach/
> > does not lead to any results or information. Maybe I am looking at the
> > wrong space?
>
> In which role (or with which hat) have you been trying to measure the
> return? And by return, do you specifically refer to the term return on
> investment?

No hats here! A plain Debian contributor role. I feel I might have
picked confusing words, while RoI I understand it as more of a finance
term. What I meant is that "as plain Debian contributor" looking at
the email archives from Dec 2019 to March 2020 I find no valuable
information, there is nothing to measure. Lack of communication
perhaps?

With my DebConf sponsors hat, I am well aware of "Improving the
DebConf fundraising processes" and I believe Anisa has done really
good work and relief quite an amount of work the team does.

> As a former Outreachy intern myself (2015) I can tell you that it the
> stipend has helped me to invest time to find my way around Debian, time
> during which otherwise I would have had to earn a living elsewhere and
> would never have gotten involved further with Debian.

It looks like you were a really successful part of the program, and
since you are Debian contributor, maybe you should consider helping
out the team and get more involved in Outreach coordination, I am very
positive you would do really awesome work there.

> There are many people in Debian who were GSoC students and are active
> Debian contributors, DMs, DDs. In which way does Outreachy differ from
> GSoC from a Debian point of view - besides the fact that it explicitly
> encourages people from underrepresented communities and non-students?

That's great, I'd love to see more successful outreach stories to help
on coordinating the Debian Outreach side of things.

Regards
-- 
 Héctor Orón  -.. . -... .. .- -.   -.. . ...- . .-.. --- .--. . .-.

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Mathias Behrle]

* Sam Hartman: " Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another
  Developer Removes my Blog" (Sat, 25 May 2019 18:37:11 -0400):

> >>>>> "Mathias" == Mathias Behrle  writes:  
> 
>     Mathias> * Karsten Merker: " Re: Question for Planet Admins: What
> Mathias> Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog" (Sat, 25
> Mathias> May 2019 17:49:13 +0200):  
> 
> Mathias> Hi together,  
> 
> Mathias> I am supporting wholeheartedly the view of Carsten with
> Mathias> some small amendments.  
> 
> In this whole discussion I've been speaking as an individual developer.
> 
> I find your position and that of Carsten  confusing.

Carsten has already answered to most questions.

> At one level you're arguing that we're not planet admins and should not
> do planet admin things.
> 
> But then you spend the rest of the message saying how planet should be
> run...you spend the rest of the message actually trying to assert the
> sorts of things that you said ought to be left up to the planet admins.

I cannot find any contradiction in saying, that *doing* the task should be left
to the planet admins, while I find perfectly reasonable to give a role some
*guidelines*. 

Mathias


-- 

Mathias Behrle
PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0xD6D09BE48405BBF6
AC29 7E5C 46B9 D0B6 1C71  7681 D6D0 9BE4 8405 BBF6

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Sam Hartman]

> "Norbert" == Norbert Preining  writes:

Norbert> Hi Sam, surprising statements from you ...

Norbert> On Wed, 22 May 2019, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> The same is true of package maintainership though.  We sometimes
>> do change the maintainership because we're unhappy with how
>> someone maintains their packages.  That rarely uses the formal
>> policy that goes

Norbert> ??? This seems to be new - at least when I became DD some
Norbert> 10+ years ago this was not the case, and it was completely
Norbert> out of discussion to do this.

I'm reasonably sure there are situations over the years where we as a
community have concluded that a package highjack was acceptable.
I might be wrong.

I'm quite confident there are cases where someone has started NMUing a
package because a maintainer is inactive and has eventually declared
themselves the maintainer without following the letter of documented
practice.

Norbert> Why would we need "package salvaging" (thanks Paul for
Norbert> that!)
Norbert> 
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch05.en.html#package-salvaging
Norbert> if we can change package maintainership just like that?

Because "just like that" involves a lot of careful thought, sometimes a
flamewar, and sometimes long discussions of whether something is the
right answer.

When we've done something enough that it's worth writing down a right
answer ahead of time to shortcircuit discussions, we sometimes do.

Package salvaging is in my mind one of those cases.

Norbert> I will remember your statement the next time I consider
Norbert> another maintainers packaging efforts insufficient.

OK. but let's make sure you understand what I'm saying fully.
I'm saying that as a DD you have the technical capability to change the
maintainership of any package.

If you do that outside of the written procedures you should be prepared
to defend your actions and suffer consequences if the community
disagrees with you.

Imagine that you write to d-devel, propose some action and get a fair
bit of support.  But you didn't quite wait long enough or the maintainer
pops up just as you do the upload or something.  It's likely the only
consequence will be that we might conclude  as a community the best
option is to revert your action.

If you don't ask for input and go off wildly on your own it's likely the
consequences will be significant.

My point is that as a community we don't typically jump at "you broke
this rule, bad!"
We typically also think about whether enough good was served to justify
breaking the rule and whether you might have found a case where the rule
was poorly crafted.



>> As a matter of technical capability we can all do a bunch of
>> arbitrary things.  As a matter of practice we sometimes do things
>> that according to written policies and procedures seem kind of
>> arbitrary.  And if

Norbert> I am not sure what you mean with *we*, but I am sure that
Norbert> most "normal" DD are not allowed to overstep the rules that
Norbert> easily.

I don't think it is easy at all.
Going and doing something and then waiting to see whether the community
agrees with you that unusual action is justified doesn't seem easy to
me.

My point is that the planet admins are taking a position that seems
fairly consistent to me with the same position we take for package
maintainership.  Normally, you follow the written rules.  Sometimes
there are exceptions.  If you act on what you believe is one of the
exceptions, then the community's trust in your actions will be
re-evaluated based on whether the community agrees with what you did.

--Sam

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Sam Hartman]

>>>>> "Mathias" == Mathias Behrle  writes:

Mathias> * Karsten Merker: " Re: Question for Planet Admins: What
Mathias> Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog" (Sat, 25
Mathias> May 2019 17:49:13 +0200):

Mathias> Hi together,

Mathias> I am supporting wholeheartedly the view of Carsten with
Mathias> some small amendments.

In this whole discussion I've been speaking as an individual developer.

I find your position and that of Carsten  confusing.

At one level you're arguing that we're not planet admins and should not
do planet admin things.

But then you spend the rest of the message saying how planet should be
run...you spend the rest of the message actually trying to assert the
sorts of things that you said ought to be left up to the planet admins.

And the planet admins have already spoken on this issue and they don't
agree with you.  Joerg's message made it clear that the situation is
more nuanced than Carsten's approach, and Mako went even further than
Joerg.

I'm confused when you respond after the planet admins do without taking
their points into account.

I've certainly confirmed my original suspicion that our community has a
wide set of views on this issue.

--Sam

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Norbert Preining]

Hi Sam,

surprising statements from you ...

On Wed, 22 May 2019, Sam Hartman wrote:
> The same is true of package maintainership though.  We sometimes do
> change the maintainership because we're unhappy with how someone
> maintains their packages.  That rarely uses the formal policy that goes

??? This seems to be new - at least when I became DD some 10+ years ago
this was not the case, and it was completely out of discussion to do
this.

Why would we need "package salvaging" (thanks Paul for that!)
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch05.en.html#package-salvaging
if we can change package maintainership just like that?

I will remember your statement the next time I consider another
maintainers packaging efforts insufficient.

> As a matter of technical capability we can all do a bunch of arbitrary
> things.  As a matter of practice we sometimes do things that according
> to written policies and procedures seem kind of arbitrary.  And if

I am not sure what you mean with *we*, but I am sure that most "normal"
DD are not allowed to overstep the rules that easily.

> It's frustrating if you want hard and fast written rules.  But it works
> a lot better than if we did try to write down those rules.

I agree with you that having less rules would be much better - that is
exactely what I proposed back then when the CoC was introduced. But
Debian tries to govern even the most ungovernable things with rules.

So all in all, your position is very surprising, and I can only assume
that the rules and acceptable behaviour you are talking about are others
than those that apply to the average DD.

Best

Norbert

--
PREINING Norbert   http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc. +JAIST +TeX Live +Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13   fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Scott Kitterman]

On May 25, 2019 9:16:09 PM UTC, Holger Levsen  wrote:
>On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 05:49:13PM +0200, Karsten Merker wrote:
>> b) The only case where I would consider a forced removal of
>>somebody else's feed by somebody who is not part of planet
>>admin to be justified would be if the further inclusion of the
>>feed on planet would constitute a criminal offence in the
>>jurisdiction where the webserver that serves planet.debian.org
>>is located
> 
>I can think of *much* annoying or disturbing content which is 100%
>legal, please don't make me show you...
>
>To start with a harmless example, starting tomorrow I will post 42 cat
>pics in 4k resolution, per hour.

Annoying, but no emergency.  Exactly the kind of case that should be passed to 
and left for the planet admins.

Scott K

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Holger Levsen]

On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 05:49:13PM +0200, Karsten Merker wrote:
> b) The only case where I would consider a forced removal of
>somebody else's feed by somebody who is not part of planet
>admin to be justified would be if the further inclusion of the
>feed on planet would constitute a criminal offence in the
>jurisdiction where the webserver that serves planet.debian.org
>is located
 
I can think of *much* annoying or disturbing content which is 100%
legal, please don't make me show you...

To start with a harmless example, starting tomorrow I will post 42 cat
pics in 4k resolution, per hour.


-- 
tschau,
Holger

---
   holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
   PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Mathias Behrle]

* Karsten Merker: " Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another
  Developer Removes my Blog" (Sat, 25 May 2019 17:49:13 +0200):

Hi together,

I am supporting wholeheartedly the view of Carsten with some small amendments.

> a) As the general rule DDs who are not part of planet admin
>should IMHO never forcibly remove somebody else's feed from
>planet on their own.  The planet admins run the service and
>whether a feed gets removed from planet is solely their
>decision (of course subject to a possible override by the
>means defined in our constitution).
> 
> b) The only case where I would consider a forced removal of
>somebody else's feed by somebody who is not part of planet
>admin to be justified would be if the further inclusion of the
>feed on planet would constitute a criminal offence in the
>jurisdiction where the webserver that serves planet.debian.org
>is located, and in this case that would have to be clearly
>stated by the person performing the removal.

It may go without saying (but explicit is better than implicit):

Such a procedure should only be justified in emergency cases that require
immediate action and if no planet admin is available in due time. And of course
it should be confirmed/reverted ASAP by the planet admins.

> c) The onus of proof that there are sufficient reasons to remove
>somebody else's feed and the onus of going through the
>procedure of contacting the planet admins and convincing them
>to take action clearly has to be on the person who wants other
>people's content removed, and not the other way around.

I would wish a documentation of the reasons in the best possible transparent
way. I know other people expressed their reservation to not create some impact
on the public image of the blocked feedowner by communicating too many details,
but there is also the interest of the project and its members to know as
exactly as possible about the reasons. Finally we all (can) know and be
aware about such implications when we join Debian and that we will be acting
(and perhaps be subject of evaluation) in the public.

> While the feedowner in question should of course consider other
> people's views on the feed's contents, as a consequence of the
> previous points, restoring the feed would IMHO be a legitimate
> action unless either the issue is covered by point b) or the
> planet admins have taken a decision against further inclusion of
> the feed on planet and have already communicated this decision to
> the feedowner.

Cheers,
Mathias

-- 

Mathias Behrle ✧ Debian Developer
PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0xD6D09BE48405BBF6
AC29 7E5C 46B9 D0B6 1C71  7681 D6D0 9BE4 8405 BBF6

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Ian Campbell]

On Tue, 2019-05-21 at 18:27 +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> If you make a bad upload, someone will be quick to point out to you
> exactly which part of debian policy you've messed up and file an RC bug
> against your package. Our community guidelines deserve to be on the same
> standard, if a blog is removed from planet Debian, it makes sense that
> there's at least a good reason for that, no?

I suppose the big difference is that while we have a reasonably (or at
least tollerably) good understanding of right/wrong from a technical
PoV (~policy) we have nothing like such a good shared understanding of 
social norms/acceptability, so one person's "good reason" to act is not
necessarily sufficient for the next and in fact might well be
considered unnecessarily inflamatory or antagonistic.

Ian.

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Charles Plessy]

Hi Phil,

Le Wed, May 22, 2019 at 01:37:07PM +0200, Philip Hands a écrit :
> 
> I see no reason to assume the worst.

Maybe growth and the law of big numbers ?  The more we are the more it
is likely to happen.

As somebody who had my work reverted temporarly by somebody who acted
alone (although motivated by good faith and his common sense), I can
tell that even though my work was later reinstantiated and the other
person (indireclty) punished, it costed me a disproportionate amount of
time and frustration.

So as a conclusion of this thread, I would be happy to read something
like "when tempted to block somebody elses contribution, do not trust
your common sense and seek the opinion of other people in charge before
taking action".

Have a nice day,

Charles

-- 
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Akano, Uruma, Okinawa, Japan

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Sam Hartman]

> "Norbert" == Norbert Preining  writes:

Norbert> On Tue, 21 May 2019, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> I think it's more open and equally clean for someone who's blog
>> has been non- consensually removed to be able to put it back
>> themselves immediately (if they think the removal was
>> unreasonable) and point the remover at the Planet Debian admins.

Norbert> Agreed. If this is not the case, what would come next?
Norbert> Arbitrary take over of package maintainership because we
Norbert> are unhappy with how X maintains their packages.

First, removing something from planet is much more akin to an NMU than
a maintainer change.
And NMUs do happen all the time.  And there are procedures and policies,
and they are often followed.  When they are not, sometimes it's hardly
even remarked because the solution was so obviously the right thing.
And sometimes it sparks significant discussion.

The same is true of package maintainership though.  We sometimes do
change the maintainership because we're unhappy with how someone
maintains their packages.  That rarely uses the formal policy that goes
before the TC who have the constitutional power to decide who maintains
a package.
Sometimes when a package maintainer is changed the response is hardly a
squeak: it was generally regarded as the right thing.  Sometimes it
sparks a lot of discussion.

And how people use the technical powers they have gets factored into our
continuing estimate of trust of those people.

As a matter of technical capability we can all do a bunch of arbitrary
things.  As a matter of practice we sometimes do things that according
to written policies and procedures seem kind of arbitrary.  And if
anyone has a problem with it, we discuss and work towards either
agreement that the arbitrary thing isn't something we want or an
understanding of why it is something we want.

It's frustrating if you want hard and fast written rules.  But it works
a lot better than if we did try to write down those rules.

--Sam

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Sam Hartman]

> "Benj" == Benj Mako Hill  writes:

Benj> I'd be happy to document this on the Planet wiki page.


I agree with Joerg that I don't think we need a lot of new rules here.
I'll point out that the situation I asked about has never happened
(although one close to it in some ways did), and it feels premature to
go set policy based on a hypothetical.

My take away is that there are complexities in situations like this.
Sometimes when you have technical access to do something but it's
unclear when you should use that technical access, acting may be the
right thing to do.  When that happens talking a lot is often a really
good next step.
Escalating the situation is something I'd personally recommend against.

--Sam

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Philip Hands]

Scott Kitterman  writes:
...
> I think defaulting to silencing people is the opposite of openness.

It does not strike me as defaulting to silencing people, to allow the
people we all effectively trust with root on all of our systems (DDs) to
exercise their judgement, and very occasionally apply it to ensure that
reputational damage does not accrue to Debian from a misjudged blog post.

> I don't recall for certain how much blogging there was about systemd
> during ...

If someone does start using this as a weapon, I'm sure we'll work out
that they probably don't deserve the trust implicit in being a DD.

Apparently (as Jorg pointed out) it has not happened to date (not even
during the heat of the systemd debate) so I see no reason to assume the
worst.

I hope that the fact that you apparently have more pessimistic
expectations does not indicate that you would find it acceptable to
remove someone else's blog simply because you disagree with them.

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
|)|  Philip Hands  [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]  HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-|  http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(|  Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34,   21075 Hamburg,GERMANY


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Norbert Preining]

On Tue, 21 May 2019, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I think it's more open and equally clean for someone who's blog has been non-
> consensually removed to be able to put it back themselves immediately (if 
> they 
> think the removal was unreasonable) and point the remover at the Planet 
> Debian 
> admins.

Agreed. If this is not the case, what would come next? Arbitrary take
over of package maintainership because we are unhappy with how X
maintains their packages.

Norbert

--
PREINING Norbert   http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc. +JAIST +TeX Live +Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13   fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Scott Kitterman]

On Tuesday, May 21, 2019 7:41:51 PM EDT Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> Greetings!
> 
> I'm a planet admin although, as you suggest, I think this is outside
> of the area of documented policy.
> 
> 
> 
> > Imagine that I get a note from a random developer saying they have
> > removed my blog from planet.  I understand what they are saying enough
> > to believe it is not vandalism; they honestly believe I did something
> > wrong.  I can't understand from their message how they hope I'd fix it.
> > 
> > I cannot engage with them in what I think is a timely manner.
> > 
> > They copied the planet admins who have not gotten involved in the
> > conversation.
> > 
> > What should I do?
> 
> The problems caused by a revert war are greater than the threat of a
> person not being on planet for a short period of time. As a result, I
> think it's best not to start a "war" by reverting a change without
> first understanding or attempting to address the underlying problem or
> getting feedback from the planet admins that the problem that caused
> removal in the first place can be ignored.
> 
> As a result, I think the preferred approach would be your (2):
> > 2) Ask the planet admins to respond to the situation and either help
> > me understand the problem or add my blog back.
> 
> If somebody removes a feed from planet because they think it is on the
> wrong side of appropriate behavior within Debian, the appropriate
> first step is to discuss it with the parties involved. I think it's
> part of the planet admins' job to mediate this conversation.
> 
> If consensus on an outcome cannot be reached this way, the
> conversation will likely need to move a mailing list and/or leadership
> within the project.
> 
> I'd be happy to document this on the Planet wiki page.
> 
> I understand that this approach gives everyone with access to the
> repository on salsa the power to temporary silence anyone else. I
> think that the benefits of this level of openness (documented in the
> list of actions Joerg shared) are high enough that they outweigh he
> risks this introduces.

The Planet Debian admins are, IMO, free to run the service however they want 
(thank you for providing it).

I think defaulting to silencing people is the opposite of openness.

I don't recall for certain how much blogging there was about systemd during 
that debacle (irrelvant to the goodness/badness of the final result, the 
process was ugly), but I can imagine if something similarly controversial 
comes up in the future, deletions from Planet Debian being rather more common 
in the heat of the moment if we codify a policy that endorses random DDs 
removing feeds from Planet Debian.

I think it's more open and equally clean for someone who's blog has been non-
consensually removed to be able to put it back themselves immediately (if they 
think the removal was unreasonable) and point the remover at the Planet Debian 
admins.

There should be consistency about what is OK and not and it's the Planet 
Debian admins that can apply that.  Yes, we have a CoC, but if something is OK 
CoC wise or not is not generally a clear cut decision.  If there's a problem, 
I think (absent some of the types of cases Joerg mentioned) that people with 
concerns should be asking the admins to address it and not unilaterally 
applying their personal standards to a project resource.

Scott K 

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Benj. Mako Hill]

Greetings!

I'm a planet admin although, as you suggest, I think this is outside
of the area of documented policy.


> Imagine that I get a note from a random developer saying they have
> removed my blog from planet.  I understand what they are saying enough
> to believe it is not vandalism; they honestly believe I did something
> wrong.  I can't understand from their message how they hope I'd fix it.
> 
> I cannot engage with them in what I think is a timely manner.
> 
> They copied the planet admins who have not gotten involved in the
> conversation.
> 
> What should I do?

The problems caused by a revert war are greater than the threat of a
person not being on planet for a short period of time. As a result, I
think it's best not to start a "war" by reverting a change without
first understanding or attempting to address the underlying problem or
getting feedback from the planet admins that the problem that caused
removal in the first place can be ignored.

As a result, I think the preferred approach would be your (2):

> 2) Ask the planet admins to respond to the situation and either help
> me understand the problem or add my blog back.

If somebody removes a feed from planet because they think it is on the
wrong side of appropriate behavior within Debian, the appropriate
first step is to discuss it with the parties involved. I think it's
part of the planet admins' job to mediate this conversation.

If consensus on an outcome cannot be reached this way, the
conversation will likely need to move a mailing list and/or leadership
within the project.

I'd be happy to document this on the Planet wiki page.

I understand that this approach gives everyone with access to the
repository on salsa the power to temporary silence anyone else. I
think that the benefits of this level of openness (documented in the
list of actions Joerg shared) are high enough that they outweigh he
risks this introduces.

Regards,
Mako

-- 
Benjamin Mako Hill
https://mako.cc/

Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far
as society is free to use the results. --GNU Manifesto


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Joerg Jaspert]

On 15409 March 1977, Sam Hartman wrote:


Imagine that I get a note from a random developer saying they have
removed my blog from planet.  I understand what they are saying enough
to believe it is not vandalism; they honestly believe I did something
wrong.  I can't understand from their message how they hope I'd fix it.



I cannot engage with them in what I think is a timely manner.



They copied the planet admins who have not gotten involved in the
conversation.


We may just want to wait to see the other side comment.

Now, Planet is kind of a special thing here, with its config being
deliberately editable by everyone in the Debian group on salsa. Yes, we
DO have the rule to modify YOUR OWN entry or that of someone you
sponsor/advocate.

And that is what happens in >99% of the cases. The "some random someone
modifies others without consent" is not really a case. So less so that I
think this whole thread already wasted more energy than it is worth. By
a lot. Look at the git log of planets config, ignoring my recent
removals of dead entries, you won't see other people randomly removing
stuff. And if they modify other people, you find "by request" or
something.

The one case back when which made you start this was also not done by
some random meatbag out there and the log message even said so. (Please,
validity of AH team with/without delegation is for another thread).

So I do not really see any big problem here that needs to be solved. We
certainly have way bigger ones to tackle.

Still, lets see...


What should I do?



1) Add the blog back myself, asking the person to appeal to the planet
admins if they still think my blog should not be present?



2) Ask the planet admins to respond to the situation and either help me
understand the problem or add my blog back.


Both of them are good. I think #2 might be better, especially if its
marked like that one case in the past. May ensure heat not going up
needlessly.


In my mind the question pops up because we have two conflicting things.
It's not really clear that random developers should be removing blogs
from planet.  On the other hand planet is a shared service and if there
really is a critical issue, it's better to get it fixed.



However, revert wars are antisocial in and of themselves.


One revert is not a war. One revert MAY make other people angry, so meh,
not directly reverting may be the better way.


Anyways, I do not think we need much more rules currently for planet. It
works pretty nicely. Assume common sense, it's what I as an admin do.

Also:

- If a blog appears hacked and spams planet - anyone is fine to remove
  it ASAP, do not wait for admins. (Happened)
- If someone asks you to modify or remove their entry, fine, go. (Happened)
- If you see a merge request on salsa for planet where someone wants to
  change their stuff - go go go, apply it, anyone (in Debian group)
  can. (Happened)
- If you happen to login to the planet-master machine, read the planet
  logs and spot stuff like NXDOMAIN or HTTP 500/404/... errors, feel
  free to remove it (or make it a MR), with a log msg along "Removed,
  NXDOMAIN", so its clear why it got removed.
- For anything else think twice if it needs direct action, if not, mail
  planet admin.

--
bye, Joerg

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Sam Hartman]

> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Carter  writes:

>> 2) Ask the planet admins to respond to the situation and either
>> help me understand the problem or add my blog back.

Jonathan> Option number two seems like the entirely logical and
Jonathan> reasonable approach. If it seems that you've overstepped
Jonathan> it doesn't seem like a good idea to antagonize the admins
Jonathan> any further, so I don't think that just adding the blog
Jonathan> back without any further feedback is every a good idea.

What antagonizes the planet admins is kind of at the crux of this
question now isn't it?
And the answer to that depends on their needs and goals.

I'll say that if I were a planet admin, like you, I'd prefer option two.

But multiple people with different outlooks from each other have been
talking to me about this.  And to them, option 1 was so obviously right
in our community that they didn't even consider that there might be
another answer.

And I found myself having arguments about what the planet admins surely
must think.  I decided that since I can go actually talk to the planet
admins and find out, that might be educational on a number of fronts.

--Sam

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Jonathan Carter]

Hi Sam

On 2019/05/21 12:15, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Obviously this question is motivated by things that happened last year,
> but I'm not asking about that situation, and the details of the question
> I'm asking are intentionally different in ways that matter at least to
> me.

It's kind of hard to ignore that case in a discussion like this, because
a blog removal seems somewhat rare and that was a prominent case.

> I am asking this question because in multiple conversations with members
> of our community related situations have come up and I'd like to better
> understand how we think we should approach disagreement in use of a
> shared resource.

I think of Planet Debian than more as just a shared resource, it's a
window into the world of Debian developers from the world outside, it's
also a way for Debian developers to follow what's happening in each
other's lives, and it also provides a voice for those who use it.

That said, people associate Planet Debian with the Debian project
itself, and while it's fine for people to disagree with the Debian
project on their blogs that get aggregated, I think that it's important
that the content itself doesn't directly violate our core community
guidelines (CoC, diversity statement, etc).

> Imagine that I get a note from a random developer saying they have
> removed my blog from planet.  I understand what they are saying enough
> to believe it is not vandalism; they honestly believe I did something
> wrong.  I can't understand from their message how they hope I'd fix it.
> 
> I cannot engage with them in what I think is a timely manner.
> 
> They copied the planet admins who have not gotten involved in the
> conversation.
> 
> What should I do?
> 
> 1) Add the blog back myself, asking the person to appeal to the planet
> admins if they still think my blog should not be present?
> 
> 2) Ask the planet admins to respond to the situation and either help me
> understand the problem or add my blog back.

Option number two seems like the entirely logical and reasonable
approach. If it seems that you've overstepped it doesn't seem like a
good idea to antagonize the admins any further, so I don't think that
just adding the blog back without any further feedback is every a good idea.

> In my mind the question pops up because we have two conflicting things.
> It's not really clear that random developers should be removing blogs
> from planet.  On the other hand planet is a shared service and if there
> really is a critical issue, it's better to get it fixed.
> 
> However, revert wars are antisocial in and of themselves.

Debian developers shouldn't just remove a blog from planet without
justification, I think that should be codified in the planet
rules/guidelines somewhere.

If you make a bad upload, someone will be quick to point out to you
exactly which part of debian policy you've messed up and file an RC bug
against your package. Our community guidelines deserve to be on the same
standard, if a blog is removed from planet Debian, it makes sense that
there's at least a good reason for that, no?

-Jonathan

-- 
  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) 
  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer - https://wiki.debian.org/highvoltage
  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋   https://debian.org | https://jonathancarter.org
  ⠈⠳⣄  Be Bold. Be brave. Debian has got your back.

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Sam Hartman]

> "Ian" == Ian Jackson  writes:

Ian> Sam Hartman writes ("Question for Planet Admins: What Should I
Ian> do if another Developer Removes my Blog"):
>> Imagine that I get a note from a random developer saying they
>> have removed my blog from planet.  I understand what they are
>> saying enough to believe it is not vandalism; they honestly
>> believe I did something wrong.  I can't understand from their
>> message how they hope I'd fix it.
>> 
>> I cannot engage with them in what I think is a timely manner.
>> 
>> They copied the planet admins who have not gotten involved in the
>> conversation.
>> 
>> What should I do?

Ian> Does the answer to this question depend very much on whether
Ian> it's Planet that's the territory for the revert war ?

Ian> ISTM that the same can be true of bugs.d.o at the very least,
Ian> and salsa, and, in principle, even the archive.

That's why I'm asking the planet admins.  I'd argue that in general we
delegate responsibility to people to run services as they choose.
It's more complex than that of course, but it's certainly common for us
to give people wide latitude to do their jobs.

So planet admins might well take a different approach than owner@bts or
salsa or...
And absent some project-wide policy or an override or something I think
the planet admins do get to decide for planet.

I think the general question is interesting, and a very reasonable
answer from the planet admins might be "We haven't thought this one
through, let's have a general discussion."

If people do decide to have the general discussion I'd appreciate it if
they were to change the subject.

--Sam

Re: Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another Developer Removes my Blog

[Ian Jackson]

Sam Hartman writes ("Question for Planet Admins: What Should I do if another 
Developer Removes my Blog"):
> Imagine that I get a note from a random developer saying they have
> removed my blog from planet.  I understand what they are saying enough
> to believe it is not vandalism; they honestly believe I did something
> wrong.  I can't understand from their message how they hope I'd fix it.
> 
> I cannot engage with them in what I think is a timely manner.
> 
> They copied the planet admins who have not gotten involved in the
> conversation.
> 
> What should I do?

Does the answer to this question depend very much on whether it's
Planet that's the territory for the revert war ?

ISTM that the same can be true of bugs.d.o at the very least, and
salsa, and, in principle, even the archive.  In theory there is
supposed to be a maintainer to decide, but the maintainer may be away
or simply not responding, or the package may be QA maintained, or
whatever.

I suppose you are asking the Planet admins and they won't necessarily
have an answer.  But maybe owner@bugs or d-release or ftpmaster may
want to say how they think these things should be dealt with in their
areas of responsibility (specifically, before or in the absence of a
specific authoritative answer from that team on the issue in
question).  That might be illuminating.

Ian.

-- 
Ian JacksonThese opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Re: Question: (Important)

[Paul Wise]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 8:40 AM, Lori . wrote:

> I've been having some problematic issues with the install of Debian 8.

Please contact the user support channels for help:

https://www.debian.org/support

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Re: Question

[Afif Elghraoui]

Hello,

على الجمعـة 29 تـمـوز 2016 ‫22:31، كتب Paul Wise:
> On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 4:37 AM,  ilpwh5p7h wrote:
> 
>> I am writting to ask you if Debian could have in the next release (Debian 9)
>> or better before in Debian 8 these 2 programs, presents in Ubuntu Linux:
> 
> If you would like to package those two programs for Debian, take a look here:
> 
> https://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers
> 

If you are willing or able to get involved in packaging, Paul has
pointed you where to start for that.

If not, you can only file a formal Request for Package (RFP) ticket and
hope that someone has the interest and time to take it up, or otherwise
convince a Debian contributor to do so.

Many thanks for your interest in improving Debian!

regards
Afif

-- 
Afif Elghraoui | عفيف الغراوي
http://afif.ghraoui.name

Re: Question

[Paul Wise]

On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 4:37 AM,  ilpwh5p7h wrote:

> I am writting to ask you if Debian could have in the next release (Debian 9)
> or better before in Debian 8 these 2 programs, presents in Ubuntu Linux:

If you would like to package those two programs for Debian, take a look here:

https://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Re: question precise

[steve]

Hi,

Le 24-05-2016, à 15:24:22 +, Jean Christophe André a écrit :


  Hi all,

  Le ven. 20 mai 2016 à 11:09, <[1]humbert.olivie...@free.fr> a écrit :

Petite note : debian et ubuntu ne sont pas la même chose bien qu'ubuntu
soit basée sur debian.
Si tu cherches de l'aide à propos d'ubuntu, alors le site
[2]http://ubuntu-fr.org sera plus pertinent
pour toi.

  I think he arrived asking here because of his disappointment about the
  level of French translation in Ubuntu.
  So, the remaining question for the Debian project would be: where can
  someone find information about the level of French translation in Debian?
  Cheers, J.C.



This information can be read here:

https://www.debian.org/international/l10n/po/fr
https://www.debian.org/international/l10n/po-debconf/fr

and for the website, here:

https://www.debian.org/devel/website/stats://www.debian.org/devel/website/stats/


Best,
Steve

Re: question precise

[Jean Christophe André]

Hi all,

Le ven. 20 mai 2016 à 11:09,  a écrit :

> Petite note : debian et ubuntu ne sont pas la même chose bien qu'ubuntu
> soit basée sur debian.
> Si tu cherches de l'aide à propos d'ubuntu, alors le site
> http://ubuntu-fr.org sera plus pertinent
> pour toi.
>

I think he arrived asking here because of his disappointment about the
level of French translation in Ubuntu.

So, the remaining question for the Debian project would be: where can
someone find information about the level of French translation in Debian?

Cheers, J.C.

Re: question precise

[humbert . olivier . 1]

Hi all,

Following in french for Sergio who is asking about Debian in french.

Salut Sergio,
il y a une liste debian-user-fre...@lists.debian.org à laquelle tu peux 
t'abonner
pour parler de debian en français.

Petite note : debian et ubuntu ne sont pas la même chose bien qu'ubuntu soit 
basée sur debian.
Si tu cherches de l'aide à propos d'ubuntu, alors le site http://ubuntu-fr.org 
sera plus pertinent
pour toi.

Bien cordialement,
Olivier


- Mail original -
De: "Sartorelli Sergio" 
À: debian-project@lists.debian.org
Envoyé: Vendredi 20 Mai 2016 16:42:02
Objet: question precise

Bonjour. J'aimerai savoir si il existe Debian complètement en français ? 
Exemple: UBUNTU en français contient 85 % d'Anglais, cela est très 
désagréable. Lorsque on télécharge une application UBUNTU ne l'accepte 
pas et qui plus est donne  ces commantaires en Anglais et vous ? Merci 
de me répondre.

Re : question precise

[MENGUAL Jean-Philippe]

Bonjour,

- Sartorelli Sergio  a écrit :
> Bonjour. J'aimerai savoir si il existe Debian complètement en français ? 

Le français est l'une des langues la mieux supportées chez Debian avec 
l'anglais, avec un  taux de traduction proche de 100 % (voire de 100 %). Donc 
oui, Debian peut être considéré comme complètement en français.

> Exemple: UBUNTU en français contient 85 % d'Anglais, cela est très 
> désagréable. Lorsque on télécharge une application UBUNTU ne l'accepte 
> pas et qui plus est donne  ces commantaires en Anglais et vous ? Merci 

Demandez sur une liste Ubuntu, cette liste concerne exclusivement Debian. En 
tout cas le problème que vous décrivez n'est pas normal. Ubuntu est bel et bien 
en français également, d'autant qu'elle est basée sur Debian. Ce que vous 
décrivez semble relever d'un paquet qui vous manque. Regardez dans les 
paramètres linguistiques ou vérifiez que les paquets Ubuntu pour le français 
sont présents.

Après quant au refus d'application, c'est à voir avec la communauté ubuntu en 
détails.

Cordialement,


> de me répondre.
> 

Re: Question

[Yaroslav Halchenko]

On Thu, 25 Dec 2014, ali reza wrote:
Greetings
Debian on the Intel 64-bit install?

yeah

Which version should I download the 64-bitA  got ia or amd?

amd64  architecture.  IIRC ia  is for itanium (rare beast,
pre-x86_64 instruction set 64bit proprietary architecture from intel --
never got adopted much thus unlikely is the one you have)

go for testing/jessie ATM -- it will soonish gets released as stable

-- 
Yaroslav O. Halchenko, Ph.D.
http://neuro.debian.net http://www.pymvpa.org http://www.fail2ban.org
Research Scientist,Psychological and Brain Sciences Dept.
Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755
Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834   Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419
WWW:   http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik


-- 
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/20141225183049.gt7...@onerussian.com

Re: Question on About Page

[Thorsten Glaser]

Raymond ray.l.rivera at gmail.com writes:

 focuses on the freedom of the users, while the definition of the
 open source movement uses the word free only in the context of
 money, but never in the context of freedom for the user. The

Ehm, you’re looking too narrowly. Do not restrict reading the OSD to
looking for the four letters “free”. The OSD is *not* about monetary
free-ness.

bye,
//mirabilos, being multilingual helps


-- 
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/loom.20140610t145800-...@post.gmane.org

Re: Question on About Page

[Raymond]

Hi Russ,

Thank you for your response. I think I understand your concern about
flame wars; and I'm definitely not looking for one. I understand it can
be difficult to represent someone else's position in a single sentence,
but I think the effort to be accurate is not in vain. For the more
political topics, it might be even more important to represent any side
involved as accurately as possible with the few statements made.

I think your modification is a good improvement towards better accuracy.
In my opinion, it does a better job at communicating an important fact
that might lead readers to investigate the details a bit further --and
(hopefully) help keep others from throwing a tantrum.

Thanks again.


Regards,

-Raymond


On 06/06/2014 10:42 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
 Raymond ray.l.riv...@gmail.com writes:

 I noticed the following statement in the introduction of your about
 page:
 In February 1998 a group moved to replace the term Free Software
 http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw with Open Source Software
 http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html. They both refer to
 essentially the same thing.
 For those who, like me, had difficulty finding this, it's:

 https://www.debian.org/intro/free

 at the top.

 Why is this? After reading from both locations, I think the statement
 that They both refer to essentially the same thing. is not accurate.
 For example, the GNU definition of free software focuses on the freedom
 of the users, while the definition of the open source movement uses the
 word free only in the context of money, but never in the context of
 freedom for the user. The difference may be subtle, but its implications
 are vastly different. It's a difference in the basic underlying
 philosophy.
 This whole thing is hugely political and spawns endless repetitious
 flamewars.  It's hard to make any statement that doesn't set off another
 one, usually accomplishing very little.  But perhaps a less controversial
 statement (since I think this part of the about page is trying to avoid
 controversy) would be something like:

 In February 1998 a group moved to replace the term Free Software
 with Open Source Software.  This terminology debate reflects
 underlying philosophical differences, but the practical requirements
 placed on software licenses, and the discussion in the rest of this
 page, are essentially the same for both Free Software and Open Source
 Software.





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Question on About Page

[Paul Wise]

On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:

 In February 1998 a group moved to replace the term Free Software
 with Open Source Software.  This terminology debate reflects
 underlying philosophical differences, but the practical requirements
 placed on software licenses, and the discussion in the rest of this
 page, are essentially the same for both Free Software and Open Source
 Software.

Thanks Russ, I've updated the English part of the website CVS with your wording.

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/caktje6gczfihx19sio1xstl_uw42ypvzpgg8qgrjrzkmrog...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Question on About Page

[Russ Allbery]

Raymond ray.l.riv...@gmail.com writes:

 I noticed the following statement in the introduction of your about
 page:

 In February 1998 a group moved to replace the term Free Software
 http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw with Open Source Software
 http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html. They both refer to
 essentially the same thing.

For those who, like me, had difficulty finding this, it's:

https://www.debian.org/intro/free

at the top.

 Why is this? After reading from both locations, I think the statement
 that They both refer to essentially the same thing. is not accurate.
 For example, the GNU definition of free software focuses on the freedom
 of the users, while the definition of the open source movement uses the
 word free only in the context of money, but never in the context of
 freedom for the user. The difference may be subtle, but its implications
 are vastly different. It's a difference in the basic underlying
 philosophy.

This whole thing is hugely political and spawns endless repetitious
flamewars.  It's hard to make any statement that doesn't set off another
one, usually accomplishing very little.  But perhaps a less controversial
statement (since I think this part of the about page is trying to avoid
controversy) would be something like:

In February 1998 a group moved to replace the term Free Software
with Open Source Software.  This terminology debate reflects
underlying philosophical differences, but the practical requirements
placed on software licenses, and the discussion in the rest of this
page, are essentially the same for both Free Software and Open Source
Software.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/871tv12s3b@windlord.stanford.edu

Re: Question about GNOME Trademark and GNOME project packages in Debian

[Thorsten Glaser]

Steve Langasek dixit:

DFSG #8 is not an issue.  DFSG #4 allows authors to require changed versions
of their software to be distributed under a different name.  If the upstream
makes special allowances for Debian to use the name for modified versions,
this doesn't fail the DFSG, because everyone still has the required rights
when using the package.

I don’t think that is true. The DFSG are sort of a promise to the users
of Debian that they can assume certain freedoms are met when dealing
with the main archive. So, if upstream allows Debian to use the original
name for modified works, but that permission is not transitive to Debian
users (redistributors, etc) it fails DFSG #8 because, sure, the users or
redistributors _could_ rename it, but that’s not what the promise is
about. In this case, it could only be met if the packages in main were
already renamed (and Debian would not make use of the special permit).

Food for thought: NMUs… Derivatives… or even simply CD distributors,
such as the people running the Debian booths at events.

bye,
//mirabilos (who’d prefer to just shut up and hack, but in this world…)

PS: Please do Cc me in replies that I should read, as I’m not on this
list.
-- 
I believe no one can invent an algorithm. One just happens to hit upon it
when God enlightens him. Or only God invents algorithms, we merely copy them.
If you don't believe in God, just consider God as Nature if you won't deny
existence.  -- Coywolf Qi Hunt


--
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/pine.bsm.4.64l.161857150.11...@herc.mirbsd.org

Re: Question about gadgets

[Bartosz Feński]

W dniu 26.07.2011 22:37, Szymon Noczyński pisze:

 My name is Szymon and I collect gadgets of different companies, 
 cities and institutions. We drew me, because it is nice to see a 
 package with some cool stuff. This has become my passion. My 
 collection is large, but do not give up and continue to collect! 
 Special place in my collection deal lanyards, mugs, badges, 
 calendars, postcards, stickers and other gadgets. He writes to you 
 asking if you will help me increase my collection of gadgets with 
 your logo? I would be very grateful for sending me some free gadgets 
 and folders. I really care about. Debian is older than me exactly 1 
 day (17/08/1993). Thanks so much

Debian as a non-profit organization doesn't produce any gadgets and
doesn't sell anything.

http://www.debian.org/misc/merchandise.pl.html

So I doubt we as a project can send you anything.

You can ask some shops that sell Debian related gadgets if they are
willing to send you something for free.

regards
fEnIo

-- 
  ,''`.  Bartosz Fenski | mailto:fe...@debian.org | pgp:0x13fefc40 irc:fEnIo
 : :' :   32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - malopolskie v. - Poland
 `. `'   phone:+48602383548 | proud Debian maintainer and user
   `-http://fenski.pl | xmpp:fe...@jabber.org | rlu:172001


-- 
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/4e2fbcf9.2040...@fenski.pl

Re: Question about GNOME Trademark and GNOME project packages in Debian

[Shaun McCance]

On Fri, 2011-07-15 at 11:07 -0400, Mike O'Connor wrote:
 When we are contacted by a owner of a trademark on which we believe we
 are infringing, the safest thing for us to do legally is to cease all
 use of the mark.  The easiest thing for us to do is to ignore their
 claim.  We'll need to figure out where we want to land between these two
 extremes, and here again, there is tension.  I don't believe it is as
 simple as you state it: ...that seems like something that will have to
 stop if the GNOME foot is not free software because of some restrictive
 TM license.  Because by that argument tells us that we have to rename
 all GNOME software, since the trademark license is restrictive about how
 we use GNOME.

Sorry for the confusion. Nobody is actually asking you to rename 
packages. We realize our  trademark usage guidelines need work. Talking
about renaming packages is not productive, because nobody from GNOME
actually wants you to do that.

We are working to improve our trademark policy and in the meantime, we
want you to know that GNOME has no complaint about omitting notices in
package names or other similar customary informal use, such as in  
emails, and we will not assert our current policy in that way, so long
as there's no confusion about whether the software is actually GNOME.

Thanks,
Shaun McCance
GNOME Foundation Board Member



-- 
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/1311804355.2158.333.camel@recto

Re: question about Debian Logo with Debian

[Ruslanas Gžibovskis]

any ideas?

On 02/07/11 00:45, Ruslanas Gžibovskis wrote:

Hello, how are you?

About me:
I am using Debian at work (workstation), home (laptop), home (mldonkey
and torrentflux and samba server), and some hosting and multimedia
desktop servers.
writing my own Linux blog, where most manuals are based on Debian.
Sometimes help my co-worker to maintain http://debian.mirror.vu.lt

Question:
I wanted to print some stickers on my car and one of them would be
Debian Logo with words: I use *Debian logo* where i can, where i can't
I use *Linux logo*

Some Researches:
I have searched your web:
http://www.debian.org/trademark
http://www.debian.org/logos/index.en.html
Can I use Debian Logo with Debian name for that purpose (my english
isn't very well as you can see), so i didn't clearly understand if I can
use it, it's not for Business, but for my personal use.

Thank you.
Waiting for your reply.
Have a nice $day_time

--
Ruslanas Gzibovskis
http://lpic.lt



--
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/4e248915.6030...@gmail.com

Re: question about Debian Logo with Debian

[Yaroslav Halchenko]

IANAL  but in short

* you can use Debian Open Use Logo (swirl) but not Debian Official
  Use Logo License (bottle)

* you are not creating a software-related product, so use of Debian
  word in your banner would not infringe the Debian trademark

On Mon, 18 Jul 2011, Ruslanas Gžibovskis wrote:

 any ideas?

 On 02/07/11 00:45, Ruslanas Gžibovskis wrote:
 Hello, how are you?

 About me:
 I am using Debian at work (workstation), home (laptop), home (mldonkey
 and torrentflux and samba server), and some hosting and multimedia
 desktop servers.
 writing my own Linux blog, where most manuals are based on Debian.
 Sometimes help my co-worker to maintain http://debian.mirror.vu.lt

 Question:
 I wanted to print some stickers on my car and one of them would be
 Debian Logo with words: I use *Debian logo* where i can, where i can't
 I use *Linux logo*

 Some Researches:
 I have searched your web:
 http://www.debian.org/trademark
 http://www.debian.org/logos/index.en.html
 Can I use Debian Logo with Debian name for that purpose (my english
 isn't very well as you can see), so i didn't clearly understand if I can
 use it, it's not for Business, but for my personal use.

 Thank you.
 Waiting for your reply.
 Have a nice $day_time

 --
 Ruslanas Gzibovskis
 http://lpic.lt
-- 
=--=
Keep in touch www.onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko www.ohloh.net/accounts/yarikoptic


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110718194920.gx26...@onerussian.com

Re: Question about GNOME Trademark and GNOME project packages in Debian

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 11:26:02PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
 We feel that it is infeasible for Debian to be in complete compliance
 with the current GNOME trademark license.  In our strict reading of this
 license, the only way to be in full compliance would require us to
 perform actions such as renaming packages in the form of
 GNOME™-control-center.  This extreme example would conflict directly
 with Debian policy on the use of non-ascii lowercase characters in
 package names as well as being technically inadvisable.  Therefore, as
 long as we are using GNOME marks, we are likely to be in some way
 violating their current trademark license agreement.

The problem here is not that Debian does not comply with the trademark
license.  The problem here is that someone made the mistake of *ASKING*
about the trademark license.

Debian is not *trading* on any of the marks in question, and there is no
reason under the sun for us to give a damn about the status of any trademark
claims until a trademark holder specifically makes it a legal question by
sending a cease and desist letter or filing a lawsuit.

It doesn't matter one bit whether we're complying with the terms of the
trademark license agreement *if we aren't doing anything that requires
licensing of a trademark*.

Now, trademarks are sensitive things for upstreams; they wouldn't have gone
to the trouble of securing a mark if they didn't care about protecting it
from dilution.  We (broadly) feel the same way about the Debian mark.  So
since we're really on the same side as the upstreams and want to get along
with them, it makes sense for us to take into consideration requests they
might have of us.  But this is not a question of freeness or legality, only
of maintaining good relations with upstream.

 The safest thing for us to do would seem to be to terminate all use of the
 GNOME marks, and essentially rebranding the software, as was done in the
 case for firefox/iceweasel.

This is a perverse definition of safe.  There is no real risk associated
with nominative and functional use of the marks (such as in package names,
directory names, and the like).

 We therefore think that the best way forward would be to make a best
 effort to correct any specific cases which they point out to us as
 problematic misuse of their marks.  But we have to be careful not to end
 up with a Debian specific solution (due to DFSG #8).

DFSG #8 is not an issue.  DFSG #4 allows authors to require changed versions
of their software to be distributed under a different name.  If the upstream
makes special allowances for Debian to use the name for modified versions,
this doesn't fail the DFSG, because everyone still has the required rights
when using the package.

 The case of the image which was created combining the GNOME foot and the
 Debian swirl seem unquestionably in violation of their trademark,

It is not unquestionably in violation of their trademark.  Trademarks are
*always* fuzzy things, and there are *always* questions about whether
something is a violation - questions that can only ever be settled
definitively in court.

It's perfectly fine for Debian to decide that, because the GNOME mark
holders *believe* it is infringing, we prefer to ask them for an explicit
license just to be safe.

 especially when you realize that the creator of this image was using the
 foot in this case with the specific intention of referencing GNOME.
 Until we can come up with some agreement with the trademark owners about
 using such a mark, Debian should stop distributing similar material.

There is no precedent for requiring Debian packages to avoid trademark
infringement as a condition of inclusion in the archive.  I am very much
opposed to anything that would require Debian to remove potentially
trademark infringing logos from packages until we have agreement with the
trademark owners.  This is entirely the wrong way around - we should always
assume that our use is permitted wrt trademark law unless either a) a court
ruling determines otherwise, or b) we decide it's not in our interest to
fight a lawsuit over the matter and as a project decide to stop using the
mark.  In no event should the ftpmasters be preemptively deciding that such
works should be excluded from the archive pending an agreement unless so
directed by Debian's counsel in the course of litigation.

 As a general comment, we feel like this problem is an unfortunate
 one. This situation is one where we have people trying to limit user
 freedom via software which is in Debian, going against Debian's core
 tenets. We understand they are doing so to defend Free Software related
 marks, but that doesn't solve the underlying problem. It may also be the
 case that from Debian's point of view, the developer body as a whole
 needs to take a formal stand by means of a GR on the general issue of
 how to resolve the tension among DFSG principles and trademark
 licenses. This would clearly resolve this issue once and for all,
 

Re: Question about GNOME Trademark and GNOME project packages in Debian

[MJ Ray]

Joerg Jaspert wrote:
 We feel that it is infeasible for Debian to be in complete compliance
 with the current GNOME trademark license. [...]

OK, sorry if this is an old chestnut, but do we actually need a
licence in general?  Is most of the use in Debian more than honest
description of the source of the software?

 The case of the image which was created combining the GNOME foot and the
 Debian swirl seem unquestionably in violation of their trademark, [...]

Yes, that seems like something that will have to stop if the GNOME
foot is not free software because of some restrictive TM licence. :-(

 [...] We understand they are doing so to defend Free Software related
 marks, but that doesn't solve the underlying problem. It may also be the
 case that from Debian's point of view, the developer body as a whole
 needs to take a formal stand by means of a GR on the general issue of
 how to resolve the tension among DFSG principles and trademark
 licenses. [...]

Is there a tension?  Isn't it obvious that many Free Software related
marks are not themselves free software?

It disappoints me when free software projects use proprietary frosting
to restrict user freedom, but it seems like an old chestnut rather
than a new problem requiring a new GR.

Thanks for any explanations,
-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct


-- 
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/20110715120113.533eb9f...@nail.towers.org.uk

Re: Question about GNOME Trademark and GNOME project packages in Debian

[Mike O'Connor]

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:01:13 +0100 (BST), MJ Ray m...@phonecoop.coop wrote:
 Joerg Jaspert wrote:
  We feel that it is infeasible for Debian to be in complete compliance
  with the current GNOME trademark license. [...]
 
 OK, sorry if this is an old chestnut, but do we actually need a
 licence in general?  Is most of the use in Debian more than honest
 description of the source of the software?

As far as I know, we have not made any inquiries to lawyers as to how
valid their claim to the GNOME mark is.  If their claim to the mark is
valid, then we could be legally be required to stop using this mark.  

 
  The case of the image which was created combining the GNOME foot and the
  Debian swirl seem unquestionably in violation of their trademark, [...]
 
 Yes, that seems like something that will have to stop if the GNOME
 foot is not free software because of some restrictive TM licence. :-(
 
  [...] We understand they are doing so to defend Free Software related
  marks, but that doesn't solve the underlying problem. It may also be the
  case that from Debian's point of view, the developer body as a whole
  needs to take a formal stand by means of a GR on the general issue of
  how to resolve the tension among DFSG principles and trademark
  licenses. [...]
 
 Is there a tension?  Isn't it obvious that many Free Software related
 marks are not themselves free software?

The way you state your question Isn't it obvious that many Free
Software related marks are not themselves free software?  Makes me want
to respond No, trademarks are not software.  Perhaps in an ideal
world we would be saying that the DSFG applies as cleanly to trademark
issues as it does to copyright issues, but in reality it is not the
case. The stance that we do not allow the use of any trademarks in
Debian would be an insane stance to take, once you realize how many
trademarks are in Debian already.  MySQL is trademarked, OpenGL is
trademarked, we mention Microsoft, Apple, and probably a number of other
companies.  Python is trademarked, mono is trademarked.  For that matter
Linux and Debian are trademarked.  We clearly are not going to either
remove all this software or rename it.  We ARE going to be using
trademarks that other entities have some legal control over.  Since this
puts us in the position of having external entities having some legal
control over what we do with our software, this is in tension with the
DFSG which tries to make sure I have complete control over the software
in Debian.

I believe we are going to have to make decisions about what to do about
a trademark we are using once a trademark owner notifies us that we are
using their trademarks in ways which they don't approve of, as it is
happening in this case with the GNOME marks, and once we are notified,
decide how we react.  In some cases, we should be able to dismiss a
trademark owner's claims entirely.  Although someone owns the Git
trademark, since our use of git is not likely to cause confusion to
people, we don't have to worry of our use as infringing.  In other cases
we might decide that our use of their mark falls under fair use and
thus not infringing. 

When we are contacted by a owner of a trademark on which we believe we
are infringing, the safest thing for us to do legally is to cease all
use of the mark.  The easiest thing for us to do is to ignore their
claim.  We'll need to figure out where we want to land between these two
extremes, and here again, there is tension.  I don't believe it is as
simple as you state it: ...that seems like something that will have to
stop if the GNOME foot is not free software because of some restrictive
TM license.  Because by that argument tells us that we have to rename
all GNOME software, since the trademark license is restrictive about how
we use GNOME.

I think it is clear in the case of the foot/swirl icon, which has been
definitively identified as infringing on their mark in a way which is
objectionable to the owners of the mark, we should cease the
distribution and/or use of this icon.  There perhaps is little tension
here. When they tell us that our non-compliance with their trademark
policy in areas like using GNOME in all lowercase letters is
objectionable, there will be considerable trouble in resolving this.

 
 It disappoints me when free software projects use proprietary frosting
 to restrict user freedom, but it seems like an old chestnut rather
 than a new problem requiring a new GR.

Since we are in the position of having to decide on multiple different
outcomes, none of which are 100% desirable, and that this is not likely
to be the last time that such a situation will arise, I believe it might
be wise to reach a consensus about how the project wants to handle these
situations. The best means to do this might be to memorialize this using
a GR.

stew

p.s. You used the term old chestnut twice.  If is some kind of
colloquialism that might carry additional meaning, it is not one I'm
familiar with, 

Re: Question about GNOME Trademark and GNOME project packages in Debian

[Russ Allbery]

Mike O'Connor s...@debian.org writes:
 On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:01:13 +0100 (BST), MJ Ray m...@phonecoop.coop wrote:

 OK, sorry if this is an old chestnut, but do we actually need a licence
 in general?  Is most of the use in Debian more than honest description
 of the source of the software?

 As far as I know, we have not made any inquiries to lawyers as to how
 valid their claim to the GNOME mark is.  If their claim to the mark is
 valid, then we could be legally be required to stop using this mark.

The point isn't that the mark may be invalid.  The point is rather that
using a trademark descriptively concerning the product for which the mark
is registered is legitimate use of the mark and doesn't require any sort
of license.  It's not clear that a trademark holder can put additional
restrictions on how the mark can be used, as long as the mark is being
used to refer to the associated product and not some different product.

However, at the point that one is making that argument, one is well into
lawyer territory with murky and inconsistent outcomes in trials.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d3hbz3a4@windlord.stanford.edu

Re: Question about GNOME Trademark and GNOME project packages in Debian

[Joerg Jaspert]

Hello world,

[ We got asked how the Debian project (and especially us as delegates
handling the archive)  has handled trademarks in the past, and our
opinion on how restrictive Trademark licenses can (or not) lead to DFSG
freeness issues. This topic cooked up with the special example of the
current GNOME trademark license, so we base our answer on that.]

We feel that it is infeasible for Debian to be in complete compliance
with the current GNOME trademark license.  In our strict reading of this
license, the only way to be in full compliance would require us to
perform actions such as renaming packages in the form of
GNOME™-control-center.  This extreme example would conflict directly
with Debian policy on the use of non-ascii lowercase characters in
package names as well as being technically inadvisable.  Therefore, as
long as we are using GNOME marks, we are likely to be in some way
violating their current trademark license agreement. The safest thing
for us to do would seem to be to terminate all use of the GNOME marks,
and essentially rebranding the software, as was done in the case for
firefox/iceweasel.  This, however, would be a huge amount of work for
Debian with very little real payoff.  We should be able to avoid doing
all this work, as it seems that the trademark owners want to work with
us in order to find some agreeable compromise.  We therefore think that
the best way forward would be to make a best effort to correct any
specific cases which they point out to us as problematic misuse of their
marks. But we have to be careful not to end up with a Debian specific
solution (due to DFSG #8).

The case of the image which was created combining the GNOME foot and the
Debian swirl seem unquestionably in violation of their trademark,
especially when you realize that the creator of this image was using the
foot in this case with the specific intention of referencing GNOME.
Until we can come up with some agreement with the trademark owners about
using such a mark, Debian should stop distributing similar material.


As a general comment, we feel like this problem is an unfortunate
one. This situation is one where we have people trying to limit user
freedom via software which is in Debian, going against Debian's core
tenets. We understand they are doing so to defend Free Software related
marks, but that doesn't solve the underlying problem. It may also be the
case that from Debian's point of view, the developer body as a whole
needs to take a formal stand by means of a GR on the general issue of
how to resolve the tension among DFSG principles and trademark
licenses. This would clearly resolve this issue once and for all,
especially given that this is the second major instance of a similar
issue. We therefore ask the DPL to consider raising the issue with the
project as a whole, most likely after any initial discussions with the
GNOME foundation have concluded.

-- 
bye, Joerg, for the FTP Team
Trying is the first step towards failure.


--
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/87mxggeeqd.fsf...@gkar.ganneff.de

Re: Question regarding Debian and CGL 5.0

[Philipp Kern]

On 2011-04-28, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
 Alex (karl exceed) Decker alex.dec...@gmail.com writes:
 Just out of curiosity, I noticed that Debian has not been registered as
 CGL compliant since the 2.0 standard. Is there any plan on working
 toward CGL 5.0 compliance?
 I understand that it's a bit above and beyond normal usage, but a proven
 5-nine uptime is something to brag about...
 This is the first time I've ever heard anyone even mention the existence
 of CGL, and I work professionally as a systems administrator for critical
 services (on Linux, even).  Does anyone actually care about this
 specification?  Often this sort of thing ends up being essentially a
 marketing tactic by the vendors involved in developing the specification
 rather than being something useful for improving technical quality.

It seems that mainly tagging a list is the main part and reporting back
what's still missing would cut it.  You can download the tag lists from the
already (self-)evaluated distributions and it looked somewhat useful/sane to
have all those parts in the distro to be there when you need it.

But yeah, sure, it would mainly be marketing for those sysadmins who try to
sell Debian as the best since sliced bread for routers and firewalls[1].
;-)  And if something's missing and subsequently added it would be helpful
for others, too.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern

[1] Maybe less for routers but more so for firewalls.


-- 
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/slrnirrk30.ct4.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de

Re: Question au sujet des droits de devloppement basé sur debian

[Tapio Lehtonen]

mokhtar_one kirjoitti:

Bonjours !
Je voudrai savoir quelle sont vos droits au sujet d'un développement 
d'une nouvelle distribution Linux basé sur debian .

Merci



Avez vous deja trouve cet texte?:
http://www.debian.org/social_contract.fr.html

--
Tapio Lehtonen
pj. Linux-Aktivaattori http://l-a.fi


--
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/4da92970.7050...@dnainternet.net

Re: Re; Question

[Tapio Lehtonen]

hattori kirjoitti:

Dear Sir.
How do you do? My name is Jun Hattori.
I want to backup web application (I know URL only).
Can your product do it ?
Please reply.
Your cooperation woud be appreciated.
Best Regards,
Jun Hattori


  
This  mailing list is for Discussion about non-technical topics related 
to the Debian Project..


You should send your question to a debian user mailing list, there are 
several available in a number of languages, for example in japanese:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-japanese/
http://lists.debian.org/users.html


--
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/4cd3ffbc.3060...@dnainternet.net

Re: Question to all Candidates: we want more, aren't we?

[Frank Lin PIAT]

Hello,

[switching to debian-project]

On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 09:57 +0200, Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
 
 Debian project raise it's expectation every year: higher quality, more
 package, more architectures, more Desktops, etc... (cool).
 
 How do we face the challenge to do more every year?

This first email introduce a series of emails, which aims to find some
super-hyper-mega-brilliant[1] ideas to help the DPL.

My first idea will focus on how people can help the DPL without stepping
up for a whole year. The second email, will introduce an idea of how to
make large/non-technical/boring projects happen. (well maybe)


Do you have more 2¢ for the DPL?

Franklin


[1] I know, April first is over, it may not be so brilliant.


-- 
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/1270243813.3612.1593.ca...@solid.paris.klabs.be

Re: Question in respect to GNU/Lnux affiliation

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Sun, Mar 14 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:

 The Hickeys hick...@nbnet.nb.ca writes:

 How come the GNU/Linux site does not have Debian on its free
 distribution list, and makes no mention of Debian at all it seems? Is
 this because Debian does not adhere to the GNU/Linux Free Software
 Definition?

 There have been a variety of different reasons over the years, but the
 primary ones, the ones that are unlikely to change, and the reasons why
 the Debian listing was removed in the first place as I understand it are:

 * Debian supports the non-free archive section even though it isn't part
   of Debian proper and provides information about it and links to it.

 * Debian does not follow the level of discipline that the FSF wants to
   follow about never linking to non-free software or non-free software
   companies.  The project promotes such software in some ways by the
   criteria used by the FSF.

Also, the project has decided that the FSF promotes software
 which is non-free (mostly software that happens to be documentation)
 and treats it as such.  So, fro Debian's perspective, the FSF want s
 Debian to execie such discipline in a selective manner (the selection
 happening by Debian ignoring it's own definitions, and hewing to the
 FSF's definitions).

manoj
-- 
Paul Revere was a tattle-tale.
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@acm.org http://www.golden-gryphon.com/  
4096R/C5779A1C E37E 5EC5 2A01 DA25 AD20  05B6 CF48 9438 C577 9A1C


-- 
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/87fx42w87q@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com

Re: Question in respect to GNU/Lnux affiliation

[Gunnar Wolf]

The Hickeys dijo [Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:20:05PM -0300]:
 How come the GNU/Linux site does not have Debian on its free  
 distribution list, and makes no mention of Debian at all it seems? Is  
 this because Debian does not adhere to the GNU/Linux Free Software  
 Definition?

The reasons my other colleagues have pointed you out might require a
bit of previous knowledge of the projects involved. In short, it boils
down to the fact that both the FSF and the Debian project have our
definitions of what the concept «Free» means. We are darn close on our
definitions, and that's why so many people today closely identify
Debian and the FSF — However, the projects have some deep differences
(among which are the ones pointed out in the other replies), and not
only the FSF regards as non-free some of Debian's decisions, but
Debian also regards as non-free some of the FSF's.

Greetings,

-- 
Gunnar Wolf • gw...@gwolf.org • (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244


-- 
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/20100317032117.ga13...@gwolf.org

Re: Question in respect to GNU/Lnux affiliation

[Angus Hedger]

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:20 PM, The Hickeys hick...@nbnet.nb.ca wrote:

 How come the GNU/Linux site does not have Debian on its free distribution 
 list, and makes no mention of Debian at all it seems? Is this because Debian 
 does not adhere to the GNU/Linux Free Software Definition?

 Thanks,
 Greg H.

Hey,

See here: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/common-distros.html

Quote:

Debian

Debian's Social Contract does say that all software in the main
distribution will be free software. Unfortunately, that's not always
true in practice. Debian has repeatedly made tacit or explicit
exceptions for specific pieces of nonfree software, such as the blobs
included in or accompanying Linux. We're still hopeful that there
won't be such exceptions in the future, but we can't turn a blind eye
to the situation as it stands today.

Debian also provides a repository of nonfree software. According to
the project, this software is “not part of the Debian system.” We
understand that's important for organizational reasons, but users
would be hard-pressed to make a distinction. The nonfree repositories
are often featured as prominently as the main ones throughout Debian's
web site, documentation, and other materials.

Regards,

Angus.


--
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/996de46c1003140857g32d73bcew6d87968264a91...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Question in respect to GNU/Lnux affiliation

[Ben Hutchings]

On Sun, 2010-03-14 at 12:20 -0300, The Hickeys wrote:
 How come the GNU/Linux site does not have Debian on its free 
 distribution list, and makes no mention of Debian at all it seems? Is 
 this because Debian does not adhere to the GNU/Linux Free Software 
 Definition?

Probably because of the non-free archive section.  Alternately because
of non-free firmware in the main section, though that will no longer be
an issue in Debian 6.0 'squeeze'.  Maybe you should ask them.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
I say we take off; nuke the site from orbit.  It's the only way to be sure.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Question in respect to GNU/Lnux affiliation

[Tiago Bortoletto Vaz]

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 03:59:53PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
 On Sun, 2010-03-14 at 12:20 -0300, The Hickeys wrote:
  How come the GNU/Linux site does not have Debian on its free 
  distribution list, and makes no mention of Debian at all it seems? Is 
  this because Debian does not adhere to the GNU/Linux Free Software 
  Definition?
 
 Probably because of the non-free archive section.  Alternately because
 of non-free firmware in the main section, though that will no longer be
 an issue in Debian 6.0 'squeeze'.  Maybe you should ask them.

Also due to linux kernel blobs:

http://www.fsfla.org/svnwiki/selibre/linux-libre/

-- 

  .''`.  Tiago Bortoletto Vaz GPG  :  1024D/A504FECA
 : :' :  http://tiagovaz.org  XMPP : tiago at jabber.org
 `. `'   tiago at {tiagovaz,debian}.org   IRC  :   tiago at OFTC
   `-Debian GNU/Linux - The Universal OS   http://www.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/20100314194259.ga17...@debian.org

Re: Question in respect to GNU/Lnux affiliation

[Russ Allbery]

The Hickeys hick...@nbnet.nb.ca writes:

 How come the GNU/Linux site does not have Debian on its free
 distribution list, and makes no mention of Debian at all it seems? Is
 this because Debian does not adhere to the GNU/Linux Free Software
 Definition?

There have been a variety of different reasons over the years, but the
primary ones, the ones that are unlikely to change, and the reasons why
the Debian listing was removed in the first place as I understand it are:

* Debian supports the non-free archive section even though it isn't part
  of Debian proper and provides information about it and links to it.

* Debian does not follow the level of discipline that the FSF wants to
  follow about never linking to non-free software or non-free software
  companies.  The project promotes such software in some ways by the
  criteria used by the FSF.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d3z6sijp@windlord.stanford.edu

Re: Question on removing something from google search

[Obey Arthur Liu]

It only appears at the end of the second page of results for me.
Beware of quoting the url directly, you just increased its pagerank...
I don't know if listmaster will remove it but even if it does, it won't
remove it from the dozen mailling list mirrors out there.
As usual, the right way to make bad results disappear is to bury it under
good results.

Cheers

Arthur

On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Dustin Romero drita...@gmail.com wrote:

 http://lists.debian.org/cdwrite/2007/01/-.htmlhttp://lists.debian.org/cdwrite/2007/01/msg00056.html

 This is the first page that comes up when you search my name. I'm in a
 position where I don't particularly want that to be attributed to me. I have
 no idea where this came from and the Dustin Romero who posted is not me, nor
 has the same email. If you can't remove it entirely can you at least remove
 it from google search? Thanks.

 Respectfully,
 Dustin Romero

Re: Question about the amount of security updates available

[Yves-Alexis Perez]

On lun, 2009-02-16 at 12:02 +, Thomas Nguyen Van wrote:
 My questions are:
 1. Do you confirm the amount of new security updates? If yes, what is the 
 link?
 2. Did you change the public key available for security updates?

http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090214
-- 
Yves-Alexis


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Question about the amount of security updates available

[Adeodato Simó]

Hello, Thomas.

We released a new version of Debian stable yesterday, which means that
the stable name in our repositories (including security repositories)
now point to this new version (which is named Lenny).

You probably have references to stable in your /etc/apt/sources.list
file. It is highly recommended that that file contains release code
names, instead of symbolic names: that way, new releases don't affect
your machines, and you just use the new name when *you* are ready to
upgrade.

In your case, since you're using the previous stable version, you should
substitute occurrences of stable with etch in that file.

The warning about the public key is a small hiccup in our release
process that we're in the process of fixing.

Thanks for your interest, and hope this mail clears up your doubts.

--- Thomas Nguyen Van [Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:02:17 +]:

 Morning,

 In our company, we hourly check security updates via the command apt-get 
 update for several months.

 This morning, this command gave me the following result that I've never had 
 until now:
 W: There is no public key available for the following key IDs:
 4D270D06F42584E6
 W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these problems

 In addition, since this week end, I have almost 100 new debian packages 
 available per server.

 I checked on the Debian's web site (http://www.debian.org/security/2009/) but 
 only few security updates are available in comparison with the amount of 
 security updates I have now whereas last week it was ok.

 My questions are:
 1. Do you confirm the amount of new security updates? If yes, what is the 
 link?
 2. Did you change the public key available for security updates?

 Many thanks for your help.

 Regards,

 Thomas Nguyen-Van 

 Senior IT Security Consultant - CEH 
 Jumper Consulting Investment Ltd 
 St. Doolaghs Park House 
 Malahide Road 
 Balgriffin 
 Dublin 17 

 Tel. +353 1 847 7756 
 Fax. +353 1 847 7785 
 Mob. +353 87 905 5041 



-- 
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer  adeodato at debian.org
 
Que no te vendan amor sin espinas
-- Joaquín Sabina, Noches de boda


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Question about the amount of security updates available

[Frans Pop]

On Monday 16 February 2009, Thomas Nguyen Van wrote:
 In our company, we hourly check security updates via the command
 apt-get update for several months.

You may have noticed that Lenny was released this weekend.
It seems to me that your /etc/apt/sources.list is probably not set up 
correctly and that your security update is actually a full upgrade to 
the new stable release. The no public key error would confirm that.

Please check if your sources.list refers to 'stable' instead of to the 
codename of the release you want to have installed, which would 
be 'etch'.

If you have not yet actually upgraded any packages, just replace 'stable' 
by 'etch' in your sources.list, run 'apt-get update', and your system 
should be fine again.

If you do want to upgrade to Lenny, I suggest to first read the Release 
Notes.

Cheers,
FJP


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Question about the amount of security updates available

[Frans Pop]

On Monday 16 February 2009, Thomas Nguyen Van wrote:
 deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
   ^^

That was exactly the problem. Your modified version looks correct.

Cheers,
FJP


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Question to donation from OnlineStore to Debian/SPI

[Ludovic Rousseau]

Le mardi 02 septembre 2008 à 15:45 +0200, Michelle Konzack a écrit :
 Hello,
 
 I am ongoing to start a new OnlineStore  selling  Debian  DVDs  and  CDs
 beside other things.  Sinde I want to donate a part of the  sales  price
 to the Debian Project I am running into some troubles.
 
 I need and organisation where peopled can get fiscal benefits in Germany
 and maybe France...

For France we _could_ have Association Debian France but the
association does not yet provides a fiscal benefit.
http://france.debian.net/

You can have a look at the FSF France. This organisation gives fiscal
benefits in France.
http://fsffrance.org/
http://fsffrance.org/donations/donations.fr.html

Bye

-- 
 Dr. Ludovic Rousseau[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 -- Normaliser Unix c'est comme pasteuriser le camembert, L.R. --


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question to donation from OnlineStore to Debian/SPI

[gregor herrmann]

On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:45:36 +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:

 I am ongoing to start a new OnlineStore  selling  Debian  DVDs  and  CDs
 beside other things.  Sinde I want to donate a part of the  sales  price
 to the Debian Project I am running into some troubles.
 I need and organisation where peopled can get fiscal benefits in Germany
 and maybe France...

For Germany there's FFIS:

http://www.debian.org/donations.de.html
http://www.ffis.de/Verein/spi-en.html
http://www.ffis.de/Verein/spi-de.html
http://www.ffis.de/Verein/donations.html 


Cheers,
gregor
-- 
 .''`.   Home: http://info.comodo.priv.at/{,blog/} / GPG Key ID: 0x00F3CFE4
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux user, admin,  developer - http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'   Member of VIBE!AT, SPI Inc., fellow of FSFE | http://got.to/quote/
   `-NP: Tom Waits: I Can't Wait to Get Off Work


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question for all candidates, was: Google SoC 2007 - we're in, sign up quickly!

[Emanuele Rocca]

* MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED], [2007-03-16  9:22 +]:
  Bastian Venthur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   Looks like Google is really everywhere these days. I'm curious about
   SoC: What where the last year's Debian projects and what was there
   outcome? Which projects where successful and which failed?

  By the way, http://wiki.debian.org/SummerOfCode2006 has links to some
  project materials, but not the reports AFAICS.

Yep, but some projects do not have links to external sources of
information at all, some other have broken links...

I personally think that SoC is a pretty good idea, and I do hope there
will be more information about achievements / problems this year.

ciao,
ema


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question for all candidates, was: Google SoC 2007 - we're in, sign up quickly!

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 09:22:40AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
 Bastian Venthur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Looks like Google is really everywhere these days. I'm curious about
  SoC: What where the last year's Debian projects and what was there
  outcome? Which projects where successful and which failed?
 
 Excellent questions!
 
 Steve McIntyre wrote in Bits from the 2IC last September:
 
   The Google Summer of Code[0] is over, and final reports have been
   submitted. Most of our students worked well right up to (and in some
   cases beyond) the end of the summer, and hopefully we'll see some
   useful results from their projects coming to light soon. Expect a
   more detailed summary of what was achieved, coming soon to a d-d-a
   list near you.
   http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/09/msg9.html
 
 but after that, I didn't find another search result until he mentioned
 the 2007 marketing campaign.  Is this the sort of fire and forget
 reporting that we would expect if Steve McIntyre were elected DPL?

As Raphaël said, often this is because the DPL (or, as in this case, the
2IC) was expecting some sort of detailed report from someone else.
Because that was taking quite some time, Steve decided that rather than
waiting (and leaving the project as a whole in the dark), it was much
better to give at least a short summary about what he knew, and then
give the full report later, rather than trying to write the full report
himself.

If writing the full report wasn't Steve's responsability, then it's not
fair to blame him that it didn't happen, either.

 How would other candidates avoid dropping topics like this?

The only way you can do that is by actively asking people to produce a
report when they said they'd do so.

-- 
Lo-lan-do Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
  -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question for all candidates, was: Google SoC 2007 - we're in, sign up quickly!

[MJ Ray]

Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 09:22:40AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
  [...] Is this the sort of fire and forget
  reporting that we would expect if Steve McIntyre were elected DPL?
 [...]
 If writing the full report wasn't Steve's responsability, then it's not
 fair to blame him that it didn't happen, either.

Just to clarify: I don't blame Steve for the lack of report; I blame him
for telling us to expect something and not 'fessing up when it was obvious
something/someone had let us down.
-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: question

[Wesley J. Landaker]

On Thursday 25 January 2007 07:48, Estudio SIMA wrote:
 Hi, just a question, which distributions of Linux are REAL open-source,
 non-commercial 100% for commercial use?

 I'm doing intelligent houses i need a stable version of linux for the
 server that runs my programs, control the circuits,etc etc, and i want to
 know several posibilities about Linux.
 Debian is one, Slackware also or not? there are another ?

Some popular ones are Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Slackware and Fedora. Since 
this is a Debian list, you can imagine that most of us would recommend you 
stick with Debian. Afterall, most of us here have tried *many* 
distributions over the years, and come to prefer Debian for a variety of 
reasons.

You can go to a site such as http://distrowatch.com/ to compare GNU, Linux, 
and BSD distributions yourself. They list a lot of details about tons of 
distributions, including their project background, a little bit about how 
they work technically, their commercial status, etc.

-- 
Wesley J. Landaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094  0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2


pgporLudBwWaR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: question sur les paquets debian

[Pierre HABOUZIT]

  Rough Translation:

  hi,

  Since quite a time I look for an answer on your site, but I can't find
it.

  In the list of packages of the stable suite, some packages are
followed by a [security] mention.

  What does that mention means, that the apckages has security flaws, or
that they have been on the contrary fixed and no flaws at all ?

  Sorry if the question seems to be stupid, or that the answer has been
given somewhere, but I'm new to debian and do not know the web site very
well.

---

  First Aurélien, debian lists are (except other mention) english only.
Not to mention that you should (for such requests) contact a user lists
rather than a developper one.  You may want to use
debian-user-french@lists.debian.org instead.

On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 07:10:05PM +0200, Aurelien PAGES wrote:
 Bonjour,
 
 Voila un petit moment que je cherche la reponse sur votre site, mais je ne
 l’ai pas trouvé
 
 Dans la liste des paquets de la version stable, certain packet sont suivi
 de [security]
 
 Que veut dire cette annotation, est-ce que se paquet a des failles de
 securité, des failles qui ont été corrigé ou au contraire, pas de faille
 du tout
 
 Désolé si la question semble idiote et que la réponse a deja été donné
 dans une partie du site, mais je suis nouveau et ne connaît pas encore
 tout les recoin du site web

  and to answer you: the security flag means that the package has been
uploaded to the security updates suite, meaning that flaws have been
*fixed*.

Cheers,

-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question And Proposal For All Candidates

[Raphael Hertzog]

On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, David Nusinow wrote:
  That's also the logic of my proposal of having more polls:
  http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/02/msg00065.html
  (just ignore the social pressure idea also elaborated in the same mail,
  it's definitely not a good one)
 
 The problem with polls is that they don't actually get anything done. It's
 just another form of talking. We don't seem to have a problem with talking,
 it's the taking action part that we have issues with.

Taking action is also not always solved by a GR. In the GFDL case, it's
pretty obvious because we just need to move doc into non-free, but if the
decision involves many more changes (like having to extract firmware from
the kernel and put them in non-free), the GR will not make that happen by
miracle.

Although I think you're right that we should try to provide guidance, at
least when someone decide to work on something he knows that the project
acknowledges that this is the right thing to do.

And for me polls could give some guidance... since they're trying to
provide a realistic representation of opinions within the project.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question And Proposal For All Candidates

[David Nusinow]

On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 08:24:55AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
 On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, David Nusinow wrote:
  system of governance take over. Fundamentally, this could have happened at
  any time with any of the problematic discussions of the past, but it didn't
  because no developer stepped up to make this decision.
 That's also the logic of my proposal of having more polls:
 http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/02/msg00065.html
 (just ignore the social pressure idea also elaborated in the same mail,
 it's definitely not a good one)

The problem with polls is that they don't actually get anything done. It's
just another form of talking. We don't seem to have a problem with talking,
it's the taking action part that we have issues with.

 - David Nusinow


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question And Proposal For All Candidates

[Ted Walther]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 09:29:51PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:

  My question, finally, to all candidates, is this: do you feel that
this is within the practical boundaries and limitations of the DPL's
office, and do you think that this semi-official responsibility would
facilitate overcoming the inertia the project has faced in the past?
Would you be willing to take on this responsibility as DPL?


My answer to all of your questions is yes.  I like the way you
summarized the role of DPL.  DPL's haven't been doing these things in
the past, but they are what I had in mind for my own tenure as DPL in
this and coming years.

A DPL can unilaterally put a GR up for vote, and I plan to put this
power to full use for the benefit of the project.

Ted

--
 It's not true unless it makes you laugh,   
but you don't understand it until it makes you weep.


Eukleia: Ted Walther
Address: 5690 Pioneer Ave, Burnaby, BC  V5H2X6 (Canada)
Contact: 604-430-4973


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question And Proposal For All Candidates

[Raphael Hertzog]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, David Nusinow wrote:
 system of governance take over. Fundamentally, this could have happened at
 any time with any of the problematic discussions of the past, but it didn't
 because no developer stepped up to make this decision.

And because a full-fledge GR is a lot of work and takes a lot of time. But
I agree with you on the analysis. We definitely need to take decisions
sooner.

That's also the logic of my proposal of having more polls:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/02/msg00065.html
(just ignore the social pressure idea also elaborated in the same mail,
it's definitely not a good one)

This is somewhere on my long-term TODO list and I will pursue it, in
particular if I'm part of a DPL team this year.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Joey Hess]

Raphael Hertzog wrote:
 Why ? When you look back at the history of debian-announce (check 1998 for
 example), we used to use that list much more than currently.

Yes I know. I'm a big fan of debian-announce in that period. Currently
though it's a moderated list with a quite limited set of postings and
the bother of needing to get through the moderation is offputting.

 There has been some policy change for this list since the introduction of
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] and maybe we should use debian-news instead
 of debian-announce but there's no reason to not use any of those 2 lists.

I do think -news would be appropriate. I forget who is allowed to post
there however. IIRC when I was posting DWN there it didn't need to be
manually moderated by anyone.

-- 
see shy jo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt]

Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 12:18:32AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
[... stable point releases ...]
 They're not really important as technical upgrade, but they give the
 impression that Debian releases something - after our last painful
 release cycle, many people have decided not to use Debian because of our
 (seemingly) slow development. Stable point releases are a nice touch to
 get a bit of trust back.
 Huh?  We had point releases on a more or less regular basis throughout
 sarge's release cycle.

More or less regular is true, but I'm not sure if once a year is
good. Let me quote something I extracted from the Debian News archive
yesterday:
3.0r0: 2002-07-19
3.0r1: 2002-12-16
3.0r2: 2003-11-21
3.0r3: 2004-08-26
3.0r4: 2005-01-01
3.0r5: 2005-04-16
3.0r6: 2005-06-02

We had one release update in 2002, one in 2003, one in 2004. After that,
shortly before the always near sarge release, the situation improved,
just to become worse for sarge again.

 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.

 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.

Marc
-- 
BOFH #62:
need to wrap system in aluminum foil to fix problem


pgpu9fwXjL3JK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Jeroen van Wolffelaar]

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]

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Joey Hess]

Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
 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.

Which will be announced as such once we have a graphical installer
that's in beta, which we don't (it currently basically FTBFS pending
lots of changes to library packages).

 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.

The main annoying thing about announcing installer betas is that it doesn't
seem entirely proper to post them to debian-announce, and posting to
d-d-a and debian-user is a poor substitute, but it doesn't prevent the
news sites from noticing it.

-- 
see shy jo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Frans Pop]

On Wednesday 08 March 2006 13:37, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
 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.

Well, that only proves you don't follow lwn all that well ;-)
http://lwn.net/Articles/162144/

Also, it was an alpha release, not a beta.


pgpZmZgZzo3Gc.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Raphael Hertzog]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006, Joey Hess wrote:
 The main annoying thing about announcing installer betas is that it doesn't
 seem entirely proper to post them to debian-announce, and posting to

Why ? When you look back at the history of debian-announce (check 1998 for
example), we used to use that list much more than currently.

There has been some policy change for this list since the introduction of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and maybe we should use debian-news instead
of debian-announce but there's no reason to not use any of those 2 lists.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

[Steve Langasek]

[M-F-T set appropriately]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 12:18:32AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
 Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
  On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:02:20PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
  Though Martin 'Joey' Schulze as stable release manager presents lists of
  packages that are accepted into the next stable point release on a
  regular basis, they normally are not released roughly two months after
  the last update (which is the official plan).

  Do you know why this doesn't work as planned? What would you do to 
  make regular point releases possible?
  I think the first thing to note is that irregular point releases aren't
  a big deal -- since they are almost solely security updates that are
  already available via security.debian.org, and TTBOMK there haven't
  been any installer updates to either woody or sarge.

 They're not really important as technical upgrade, but they give the
 impression that Debian releases something - after our last painful
 release cycle, many people have decided not to use Debian because of our
 (seemingly) slow development. Stable point releases are a nice touch to
 get a bit of trust back.

Huh?  We had point releases on a more or less regular basis throughout
sarge's release cycle.  Why would the existence of sarge point releases
inspire confidence in our release cycle?  Why *should* it inspire
confidence?  The two processes are almost entirely unconnected.

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.debian.org/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: question about a domain name

[Alexander Wirt]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am Dienstag, den 24. Mai 2005:

 Dear Sir, Madam
 
 I was looking for buy a domain name (mine) in .org but when I use
 www.brou.org, I arrive on www.debian.org !
From your site:
This computer has installed the Debian GNU/Linux operating system but 
has
nothing to do with the Debian GNU/Linux project. If you want to report
something about this host's behavior or domain, please contact the ISPs
involved directly, not the Debian Project.

Any further questions?

Alex