Re: tag2upload, reproducible .orig and dfsg repacks

2024-06-26 Thread Brian May
Matthias Urlichs  writes:

> IMHO this is a mostly-solved problem.
>
> You can feed hashes of the offenders to "git filter-repo 
> --strip-blobs-with-ids ‹filename›". This operation is idempotent and 
> deterministic.
>
> If we add these hashes to a file, let's say d/source/dfsg-filtered, we 
> can thus reproducibly generate a dfsg-compliant version of whichever 
> upstream commit or tag we want, and of course generate a tarball from 
> there if required.

Sometimes files have to be edited and/or created in order to make the
tar ball DFSG complaint and not fail build. Just deleted a list of files
is not sufficient.

For example, if an individual file contains a mixture of non-dfsg stuff
and dfsg stuff that is required for building.

For more details, see this really old discussion, from 2008.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/06/msg00233.html

I hope I haven't just opened a can of worms here :-)
-- 
Brian May @ Debian



Re: Summary of the current state of the tag2upload discussion

2024-06-24 Thread Brian May
Russ Allbery  writes:

>  Misattribution of the source package

For a real life problem that I imagine tag2upload will solve:

It is reasonable common that git is the "authoritative source of truth"
for the current state of the project.

But like it or not mistakes can happen. e.g. somebody applies a security
update to the project. And uploads it to Debian. But forgets to do a git
push to salsa.

Then later on - maybe months. Or years. The packages I deal with don't
change frequently. Somebody else makes changes to the git based on the
salsa repo. And they push the changes to salsa. And they upload a new
version to Debian. But surprise surprise, that version conflicts with
the version already in the repo, due to the conflicting Debian version
number.

If the person is observant they will realize that this is a sign that
the git repo is missing a version that is in the Debian
upload. i.e. They are missing the security fix. The debian/changelog
should make this obvious. And that the git repo is missing the version
that has already been uploaded to Debian, and fixing this is now going
to be messy. Because the git repo now contains conflicting changes for
the same version. Maybe the solution here is to forget about trying add
the current Debian version to git, and just worry about including all
the required changes for the next release.

On the other hand, if they are rushing too much, they may decide just to
increment the version number. And suddenly that important security fix
has just been dropped.

Or maybe due to legacy reasons, the version somehow did get incremented
without anyone noticing, no conflict occured on the upload, and the
security fix siliently got lost.

But: If there was a requirement that the git repo be pushed in order to
do the upload to Debian, none of this would have happened. As I imagine
would be the case if you used tag2upload.

Yes, I have had this scenario happen a number of times now. It is
horrible when it does happen.
-- 
Brian May @ Debian



Re: Security review of tag2upload

2024-06-17 Thread Brian May
Simon Josefsson  writes:

> Successfully attacking ALL individual developers, with each own
> individual security weaknesses, seems to me more costly than attacking a
> single known publicly run instance like tag2upload or Salsa.

You only need to be able to sucessfully attack *one* developer in order
to cause significant damage.

The more popular that developers packages are, the more damage you can
do.

So the developer with the weakest security practises and most popular
packages is probably a prime candidate.
-- 
Brian May @ Debian



Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

2019-03-25 Thread Brian May
Ansgar  writes:

> As a simple test I tried to join #debian over the bridge.  It doesn't
> work out of the box as #debian need registered nicks.
>
> Figuring out how to register a nickname on OFTC over the Matrix bridge
> and having to do that before joining a channel is a pretty high barrier.

This was a problem for the last linux.conf.au which uses Matrix
successfully.

For me the process made perfect since *after* I had done it.

Surely it wouldn't be too difficult to write some sort of tool to
automate the process?
-- 
Brian May 



Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

2014-10-16 Thread Brian May
On 17 October 2014 08:25, Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org wrote:

 By turning such bugs into RC bugs, the proponents are exactly advocating
 this position: they put the burden on an under-staffed team.


If people feel strongly that init system XYZ should be supported, then
presumably somebody will do the work to make sure it is supported, and it
does work. As I believe is the case now. e.g. my understanding is Gnome is
not dependant on systemd, and it didn't need any GR for this to happen.
People didn't do this work only to have it reverted tomorrow.

If nobody is willing to do the work to ensure it does work, maybe that
suggests nobody really wants to support XYZ any more.

The result of this GR is not going to change any of the above. It could
build up resentment. Especially if maintainers get bug reports for initd
systems they don't use, can't test, and can't find anybody willing to offer
help to fix the problems.

On another topic, I think we need a GR stating that all software should
work 100% with any window manager, especially my favourite window manager,
Awesome. Awesome is the only window manager that does X, Y, and Z properly
(insert highly controversial/disputed and subjective criteria for X, Y Z,
e.g. Unix philosophy, CLI support, keyboard support, single purpose
non-integrated non-monolithic design, text configuration files, text log
files, etc). If not supported, it prevents me exercising my choice in
deciding what window manager I want to use. Never mind that this isn't a
big issue; only a GR can guarantee it won't be an issue tomorrow. Anyone
want to help me with my proposal? :-)
-- 
Brian May br...@microcomaustralia.com.au


Re: blablablablablablabla (was Re: lifting censorship during the DPL campaign ...

2009-03-26 Thread Brian May

 which censorship
   

Does it matter?

I think we can guess what he meant to say even though he may have used
the wrong word for the purpose.

 Could people please stop bringing this up again and 
 again?
   

The best way of helping that is to ignore minor and controversial issues
like this one.

Assume it was a mistake (even if it was deliberate - who cares?).

-- 
Brian May br...@microcomaustralia.com.au


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



Re: Debian Project Leader Election 2009: Final call for nominations.

2009-03-09 Thread Brian May
MJ Ray wrote:
 That treads on the singular they landmine.  Also, it sounds like
 it's the Debian Developer's validity in question.

 How about Debian Developers may nominate themselves by sending a
 signed email to debian-vote@lists.debian.org?
   

How about: To be valid, a Debian Developer can send a signed email
nominating oneself to the debian-vote@lists.debian.org lists?

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/oneself

Also see:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:English_inflection#Forms_of_pronouns

According to this page, themself is singular and themselves is plural.

The http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/themself pages says According to
many this is incorrect and its use should be avoided, however it is also
noted to have been in common use for hundreds of years. The issue stems
from they http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/they which is used as a
gender-neutral third-person pronoun, though this use is also considered
non standard. More information can be found at the usage notes
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/they#Usage_notes on that page.

Personally I don't really care - it is up to the author to decide.

I just haven't seen anybody discredit oneself for the job yet ;-).

-- 
Brian May br...@microcomaustralia.com.au


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



Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR

2008-12-17 Thread Brian May

Margarita Manterola wrote:

If we do all this, we would be voting:

A) If we trust or not the release team on making the right choices of
which bugs to ignore and which not (regardless of this being firmware
issues or what have you).  This is from now on, not just for Lenny.

B) If we want to allow sourceless firmware in Debian, defining
firmware in a way that doesn't give a waiver to anything else without
source. This is also from now on, not just for Lenny. But it's only
for firmware, not for everything with licensing problems.

C) If we want to allow stuff with some problems into Lenny, as we
already did for Sarge and Etch.

These three issues are obviously related, but are NOT the same issue,
a positive result in one does not determine what happens to the
others.  And creating one mega ballot with all the different
possibilities, only creates confusion and frustration.  So, this
should be three independent ballots.
  


I think the concern is, what if the results conflict?

e.g. if we get a No for (C) but Yes for (A). We trust the release team 
to make the right choices but we don't trust them to make the right 
choices for Lenny?


My suggestion would be to vote for (C) first, and then decide the 
wording on (A) and (B) depending on the outcome of (C). In which case, 
even if there is a conflict, the wording can clarify if the second vote 
overrides or doesn't override the first result.


--
Brian May br...@microcomaustralia.com.au


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



Re: Call for seconds: post-Lenny enforceability of DFSG violations

2008-10-27 Thread Brian May

Robert Millan wrote:

  [...] the package must be moved
  from Debian (main suite) to the Non-free repository (non-free suite).
  


Why not remove the package from testing, same as any other release 
critical bug?


Or if you are worried about unstable containing non-DFSG stuff, why not 
remove the package altogether, and allow somebody to upload to non-free 
if deemed appropriate?


I think automatically moving it to non-free may not always be the best 
solution.


Brian May


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



Re: Proposal: GR to deal with effects of a personal dispute

2007-06-01 Thread Brian May
 Sven == Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Sven Notice that in the above, i said : i prefer fixing it, and
Sven notice the semantic difference between that and i
Sven want.

True - I might have oversimplified...

Sven But then maybe we don't speak the same language. I
Sven guess none of this matters though, since debian has decided
Sven to expulse me anyway, just like they did for Jonathan/Ted
Sven Walter, without ever thinking of setting up a procedure to
Sven handle expulsion fairly.

:-(
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: Proposal: GR to deal with effects of a personal dispute

2007-05-31 Thread Brian May
 Sven == Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  Do we really want to go into creating castes of DDs ?
 
 No, but it's already happened.  Let's move on.

Sven I prefer fixing it, now is the right moment to solve it once
Sven and for all in the right way.

Just an observation:

This whole problem seems to be because everyone, from both sides, is
thinking about the situation in terms of what *they* want or don't
want:

* I want these flame wars to go away
* I want the mailing lists to become technical content again
* I want Sven to go away and not come back
* I want Sven to stop posting so much
* I want Sven to stop posting inflammatory posts
* I want to be sure these problems don't reoccur
* I want Debian to treat me fairly
* I want Debian to treat developers fairly
* I want Debian to have fare processes to deal with this in the future
* I want ...
* etc

Some of these may or may not conflict. No particular order. I probably
missed some.

This strategy is not going to work. Just saying I want ... is not
going to convince the other party to change their mind and give it to
you.

Even the approach if you give me X I will give you Y may not work,
unless people trust that you will give Y.

A better approach is required - repeatedly banging your head against
the wall is not going to help. No matter how hard or how long you do
it for.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: Proposal: GR to deal with effects of a personal dispute

2007-05-30 Thread Brian May
 MJ == MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

MJ 1. Sven Luther is suspended from all debian lists for a year,
MJ which should be similar to (b), because the project generally
MJ liked his two-month self-suspension and wishes not to receive
MJ his discussion contributions at the moment.

MJ 3. Sven Luther is reinstated as a full developer, reversing
MJ (a), because the project wishes to receive his technical
MJ contributions.

Is it possible to act as a developer without mailing list access?

MJ 4. Evading the suspension will be regarded as a second offence
MJ of header-forgery on lists.debian.org and should result in
MJ immediate expulsion, as in the Debian Machine Usage Policies.

I assume other people will be able to post on Sven's behalf, or would
this be considered evasion?

Or maybe it was intended that the above only apply for deliberate
evasion by working around the restrictions as opposed to accidental
once off evasion (e.g. IP addresses change for genuine reasons, email
addresses may change for genuine reasons) or somebody else posting on
Sven's behalf (presumably this person would be responsible for
ensuring the content is technical only).
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: GR PROPOSAL : The Debian Infrastructure is owned by the whole Debian project, and not a few select individuals.

2007-05-27 Thread Brian May
 Sven == Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Sven [...] It is acceptable, for security reasons, that not every
Sven Debian Developper has access to some of these ressources,
Sven but if he request such an access, he should obtain it in a
Sven timely fashion (no less than two weeks).

Did you, perhaps, mean to say no *more* than two weeks?.

Or maybe I just misread it, sorry if I did.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: A question to the Debian community ...

2007-05-17 Thread Brian May
 Sven == Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Sven It is easy enough, that the powers-in-debian stop to try to
Sven punish me for it, an,d that a real and fair mediation
Sven happens, and that the other party honestly tries to forget
Sven the past grudges.

Unfortunately I don't think a fair resolution will happen. As unfair
as this might be.

Sven How do you expect me to forget the old grudges, when each
Sven time i tried to forget them, they where forced down my
Sven throat with more extreme agression ? First after christmas
Sven with an unwarranted demand of a list ban, then in end of
Sven february with a renewed expulsion request.

Some people might see this as justification for banning you from the
mailing lists. If you weren't subscribed to the mailing lists, people
might stop publicly trying to provoke you.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: A question to the Debian community ...

2007-05-10 Thread Brian May
 Sven == Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Sven   This committee would then investigate the issue, try to
Sven talk with all parties involved, and get them to forget their
Sven old grudges, and come to an agreement on how this could go
Sven forward without punishing one side and hoping they will go
Sven away.

What do you think is the minimum required for *you* to forget your old
grudges?

Lets *assume* the other party is not going to budge. They continue to
justify the decision to have you expelled. No number of emails, GRs,
committees, or mediators can change their minds, as they have already
decided.

Would there be anything else that could happen to allow you to forget
your old grudges?
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: Proposal: Recall the Project Leader

2006-09-24 Thread Brian May
 martin == martin f krafft martin writes:

martin What the heck are you guys doing??? Let's release etch,
martin please ffs.

Seconded.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-04 Thread Brian May
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 People tend to ask ... but can I really use a license such as the GPL
 for documentation? I thought GPL was for software only.
 
 Do we need to address this point?

I'm not sure. That's covered in the GPL FAQ and should be clear
from the definition of Program in the GPL.

-- 
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: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

2006-01-03 Thread Brian May
On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 21:17 -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
 The recommendation is: License your documentation under the same license
 as the program it goes with.  If you need to license under the GFDL for some
 reason, dual-licence.
 
 I think -legal came to a very definite consensus that licensing the
 documentation under the exact same license as the program was always the
 right thing to do.  It saves *so* much trouble.

People tend to ask ... but can I really use a license such as the GPL
for documentation? I thought GPL was for software only.

Do we need to address this point?
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge

2004-05-02 Thread Brian May
 Jason == Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Jason Pretty much everything has embedded 'firmware' of one kind
Jason or anyother.  Sometimes you don't see it, because it is in
Jason flash or ROM'd into the chip.  Though, often it ends up in
Jason a driver primarily to save on the cost of flash and/or to
Jason ease updating it to new versions.

hat mode=devils advocate

So, as far as Debian is concerned, if the firmware is on a ROM or
otherwise hard-coded in the hardware its OK; However it is not OK if
the firmware has to be distributed with the software?

Don't both cases limit the users freedom in the same manner? In fact,
isn't it the case that with the second case, at least there exists the
possibility of creating new firmware without tampering with hardware,
meaning it enhances freedom?

Do we want to risk sending manufacturers the wrong message in that
they have to hard-code proprietary firmware on the hardware in order
to get the hardware accepted by Debian?

What about DFSG software that *requires* proprietary hardware in order
to operate? Should this go into contrib?

/hat

I apologise if this has already been said, I really can't keep up with
this thread.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge

2004-05-02 Thread Brian May
 Jason == Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Jason Pretty much everything has embedded 'firmware' of one kind
Jason or anyother.  Sometimes you don't see it, because it is in
Jason flash or ROM'd into the chip.  Though, often it ends up in
Jason a driver primarily to save on the cost of flash and/or to
Jason ease updating it to new versions.

hat mode=devils advocate

So, as far as Debian is concerned, if the firmware is on a ROM or
otherwise hard-coded in the hardware its OK; However it is not OK if
the firmware has to be distributed with the software?

Don't both cases limit the users freedom in the same manner? In fact,
isn't it the case that with the second case, at least there exists the
possibility of creating new firmware without tampering with hardware,
meaning it enhances freedom?

Do we want to risk sending manufacturers the wrong message in that
they have to hard-code proprietary firmware on the hardware in order
to get the hardware accepted by Debian?

What about DFSG software that *requires* proprietary hardware in order
to operate? Should this go into contrib?

/hat

I apologise if this has already been said, I really can't keep up with
this thread.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Just a single Question for the Candidates

2004-03-04 Thread Brian May
 Helen == Helen Faulkner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Helen However, after reading over some of the posts to this
Helen thread, I think that was probably wrong. Both kinds of
Helen sexism are evidently around and healthy in this
Helen environment.  Of course not coming from all, or even the
Helen majority of people.  It doesn't take many idiots in the
Helen community to put your average interested woman off, if
Helen we're going to have to deal with that kind of attitude.
Helen And you wonder why there are few female debian developers?!

I personally don't recall any sexism on/at any Linux forums. Possibly
this is because I have forgotten. Are the following statements
true/false?

* The majority of Debian developers do the right thing, the problem is
  with the minority that don't.

* The majority of Debian fans do the right thing, the problem is with
  the minority that don't. (same as above, but including non-Debian
  developers).

* Sexism is more likely to occur in IRC and E-Mail then real life
  conversations.

Helen People who haven't already, could learn from reading:
Helen http://www.linux.org/docs/ldp/howto/Encourage-Women-Linux-HOWTO/index.html
Helen especially the section about the problems women face in
Helen approaching linux communities.

Seems sensible reading, and could be beneficial even if only read by
people who already try to do the right thing.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: Just a single Question for the Candidates

2004-03-03 Thread Brian May
 Helen == Helen Faulkner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Helen I have never had a hostile experience with debian, but I
Helen still feel really unconfident when I interact with the
Helen debian community, even if it's only posting a bug report.
Helen I don't understand why this is so, but it's very real.
Helen Partly it's knowing that I'm going to be dealing with a man
Helen (almost certainly), and he may assume I don't know what I'm
Helen doing, and he may put me down or be condescending or unkind
Helen as a result.

I don't know you are how long you have been with Debian or what your
contributions are, but are you sure that this lack of confidence isn't
due to inexperience?

I know when a friend first installed Debian on my Linux computer,
years ago, I was really hesitant to file bug reports or say things on
the mailing lists (what if I am wrong? what if the issue is not
reproducible? what if I haven't given enough details? what if some of
the details I gave were misleading? what if the sky should fall? what
if ...?)

Then I considered the worst that could happen, I could make a total
fool of myself and nobody would appreciate me in this
community. Considering I was new to this community, that wouldn't be
any great loss, I would simply be back where I started from. Strangely
enough, this worst case never took place, and even stranger, I have
had a recent employer praise me based on some of the messages I have
sent. Now thats weird...

Then I see other family members (both male and female) who use private
email all the time to talk to friends, but it is a real struggle to
get any of them to file bug reports when they identify a
bug. Typically it is easier to use google to find information, but
nobody even thinks of sending an email to an expert in the field if
the required information cannot be found.

So I think there is a learning curve to get into Debian, regardless of
sex (I am Male); however, I find it hard to think of the issues I have
faced in the past since I have come so far. So, for example, it is
difficult for me to help others file bug reports, because to me, it
just comes naturally (now).
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: GR: Removal of non-free

2004-01-02 Thread Brian May
 Anthony == Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Anthony Which is to say, Debian did all it's done in order to
Anthony support free software. Whatever effort's spent on this
Anthony new non-free network, most of it is going to be of no
Anthony benefit to those of us who don't use non-free software.

Anthony Basically, the issue is why spend 100 man hours on
Anthony maintaining Debian, then another 90 man hours on
Anthony maintaining a separate non-free repository, when you can
Anthony spend 101 man hours maintaining Debian and it's existing
Anthony support for non-free?

Could splitting non-free be seen as counter-productive to our aims?

ie. Non-Free software has been just been split from Debian at a cost
of 90 man hours; Non-free software must be important for
users. Otherwise, if it wasn't important, why bother splitting it
apart?
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: GR: Removal of non-free

2004-01-02 Thread Brian May
 Anthony == Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:

Anthony Which is to say, Debian did all it's done in order to
Anthony support free software. Whatever effort's spent on this
Anthony new non-free network, most of it is going to be of no
Anthony benefit to those of us who don't use non-free software.

Anthony Basically, the issue is why spend 100 man hours on
Anthony maintaining Debian, then another 90 man hours on
Anthony maintaining a separate non-free repository, when you can
Anthony spend 101 man hours maintaining Debian and it's existing
Anthony support for non-free?

Could splitting non-free be seen as counter-productive to our aims?

ie. Non-Free software has been just been split from Debian at a cost
of 90 man hours; Non-free software must be important for
users. Otherwise, if it wasn't important, why bother splitting it
apart?
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: our users as one of our priorities

2003-03-08 Thread Brian May
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 10:29:37AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
 #include hallo.h
 * Branden Robinson [Fri, Mar 07 2003, 03:23:37PM]:
  On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 11:37:15AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
   Perhaps it is more a matter of not demonstrating that you have listened.
  
  Well, I don't think that's a fair statement.  I corresponded in a fairly
  detailed manner Osamu Aoki regarding bug #168347, for example.
 
 Well, I do think so. You ignored my proposal completely and

(I can't comment on this; unless it is your proposal in bug #168347)

 answered-in-a-detailed-manner to Osamu and did the same: nothing.

This doesn't support the hypothesis that Branden doesn't demonstrate
that he has listened.

Rather it supports what Branden said earlier that he doesn't always
agree with you.

...and if the DPL always agreed with everything I said, I think I would
be rather suspicious of that DPL[1]...

(some people seem to think listen and agree are the same word; they
are not).

Notes:
[1] Unless of course I was the one offering the bribes ;-).
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: our users as one of our priorities

2003-02-28 Thread Brian May
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 12:24:20PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
 On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 04:30:43PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
  That is not only about me - you did not listen to any other person
  showing you a way to change the current behaviour.
 
 Incorrect; I listened, though I disagreed.

Perhaps it is more a matter of not demonstrating that you have listened.

(some examples would be ideal here, but I don't have any).

(not my observation, just my interpretation of both the comments above,
perhaps taken out of context).
--
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: our users as one of our priorities

2003-02-28 Thread Brian May
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 12:24:20PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
 On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 04:30:43PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
  That is not only about me - you did not listen to any other person
  showing you a way to change the current behaviour.
 
 Incorrect; I listened, though I disagreed.

Perhaps it is more a matter of not demonstrating that you have listened.

(some examples would be ideal here, but I don't have any).

(not my observation, just my interpretation of both the comments above,
perhaps taken out of context).
--
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: General Resolution draft against spam.

2002-10-16 Thread Brian May

On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 06:59:26PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
 - The public web archives of the different debian mailing lists, past,
 present and future, will be processed so that it becomes impossible
 for an ordinary user not having special privileges to mail someone who
 posted something to any debian list.

The number of useless postings of the following form will increase:

Can the person who posted URL:http://lists.debian.org// please
contact me? I want to know if I can please (get a copy of their source|
ask about how it works|find out of that really is a typo|find out
if the information is now obsolete|find out when/if it is going
to be implemented|etc)?

Sorry about posting this to the mailing list, but I can't seem to
work out what your E-Mail address is from the mailing list archive.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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




Re: General Resolution draft against spam.

2002-10-16 Thread Brian May
On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 06:59:26PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
 - The public web archives of the different debian mailing lists, past,
 present and future, will be processed so that it becomes impossible
 for an ordinary user not having special privileges to mail someone who
 posted something to any debian list.

The number of useless postings of the following form will increase:

Can the person who posted URL:http://lists.debian.org// please
contact me? I want to know if I can please (get a copy of their source|
ask about how it works|find out of that really is a typo|find out
if the information is now obsolete|find out when/if it is going
to be implemented|etc)?

Sorry about posting this to the mailing list, but I can't seem to
work out what your E-Mail address is from the mailing list archive.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

2001-03-13 Thread Brian May

 "Ben" == Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Ben I would certainly not like to vote for someone who just said
Ben "I'll support whatever the project supports", since that
Ben would not be a "leader" at all, but a follower :)

The leader has to make the right decision. This may mean getting data
from various sources, eg. votes, known experts in the field, etc. Some
of these sources might contradict, in which case, the leader must
decide how to resolve the issue.

Or, it might mean delegating the decision to somebody else who the DPL
considers more experienced in the given area, or who may be able to
come up with a better decision.

However, once the decision has been made, then the leader must be able
to convince others to execute it, in order to lead (like Ben said).

I see the leader as the person who prevents everybody heading in
different (incompatible) directions, and has the final say which
direction is the right direction. So, unlike Ben, I don't see any
problems with "I'll support whatever the project as a whole supports",
because it is still leading the project in a single and unified
direction.

If however, the DPL said "I'll let everybody do what they want to do",
that would be bad, because everybody is going to have a different
opinion. Instead of 1 project with XXX developers, you are likely to
end up with XXX projects with 1 developer each ;-).
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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




Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

2001-03-13 Thread Brian May
 Ben == Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Ben I would certainly not like to vote for someone who just said
Ben I'll support whatever the project supports, since that
Ben would not be a leader at all, but a follower :)

The leader has to make the right decision. This may mean getting data
from various sources, eg. votes, known experts in the field, etc. Some
of these sources might contradict, in which case, the leader must
decide how to resolve the issue.

Or, it might mean delegating the decision to somebody else who the DPL
considers more experienced in the given area, or who may be able to
come up with a better decision.

However, once the decision has been made, then the leader must be able
to convince others to execute it, in order to lead (like Ben said).

I see the leader as the person who prevents everybody heading in
different (incompatible) directions, and has the final say which
direction is the right direction. So, unlike Ben, I don't see any
problems with I'll support whatever the project as a whole supports,
because it is still leading the project in a single and unified
direction.

If however, the DPL said I'll let everybody do what they want to do,
that would be bad, because everybody is going to have a different
opinion. Instead of 1 project with XXX developers, you are likely to
end up with XXX projects with 1 developer each ;-).
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

2001-03-12 Thread Brian May
 Marcus == Marcus Brinkmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marcus If I were nominated, I surely wouldn't make any hard
Marcus concrete promise about any particular issue. I would
Marcus always leave room to change my opinion upon new facts
Marcus revealed to me in the process. Answering yes/no to a
Marcus question of intention is possible, but not very
Marcus meaningful.

Good point.

I wouldn't want an elected DPL to blindly do X, because that is what
he/she promised before the election, when new evidence comes to light
that indicates that X is bad (eg. perhaps some new solution Y is
suggested that removes the need for X).

If for instance, a DPL said yes I will take action on X, and was
latter convinced that X is wrong, then either the DPL can do X anyway
(the wrong thing) or not do X (which some have stated they would
interpret as a lie).

Back to the original question, I think it would be more important
to find out what steps do you plan to take to resolve the non-free
debate?

I would expect something like a step by step process, eg:

1. arrange for public vote.
2. kill the opposition.
3. make the change.
4. issue resolved.

I think this conveys all the information the voters need (in the above
case the candidate is extremely biased and probably should not be
elected), but at the same time doesn't lock the candidate down to any
single decision.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

2001-03-11 Thread Brian May

 "Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marcus If I were nominated, I surely wouldn't make any hard
Marcus concrete promise about any particular issue. I would
Marcus always leave room to change my opinion upon new facts
Marcus revealed to me in the process. Answering yes/no to a
Marcus question of intention is possible, but not very
Marcus meaningful.

Good point.

I wouldn't want an elected DPL to blindly do X, because that is what
he/she promised before the election, when new evidence comes to light
that indicates that X is bad (eg. perhaps some new solution Y is
suggested that removes the need for X).

If for instance, a DPL said "yes I will take action on X", and was
latter convinced that X is wrong, then either the DPL can do X anyway
(the wrong thing) or not do X (which some have stated they would
interpret as a lie).

Back to the original question, I think it would be more important
to find out "what steps do you plan to take to resolve the non-free
debate?"

I would expect something like a step by step process, eg:

1. arrange for public vote.
2. kill the opposition.
3. make the change.
4. issue resolved.

I think this conveys all the information the voters need (in the above
case the candidate is extremely biased and probably should not be
elected), but at the same time doesn't lock the candidate down to any
single decision.
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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




Re: my answers to questions

2001-03-05 Thread Brian May

 "Bdale" == Bdale Garbee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Bdale I use computers for a lot of different kinds of tasks.
Bdale While the vast majority of my time is spent on Debian
Bdale systems, I'm not ashamed to use commercial software when
Bdale there is no suitable Open Source solution.  The
Bdale highest-profile examples at home are Quicken and Turbotax
Bdale for my complex personal finances, Cadsoft's Eagle for
Bdale schematic capture and PC board layout (this runs on Linux,
Bdale at least!), and a diverse mix of free and non-free
Bdale development tools for my amateur radio and amateur
Bdale satellite projects.

Would you consider changing to an alternative (eg. gnucash) if/when it
does everything you need/want from it?

Or, would you prefer the stability of using an existing product that
you know to be reliable (assuming this is the case)?
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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




Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

2001-03-05 Thread Brian May
 Ben == Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Ben non-US developers catch flames simply because they did not
Ben understand a post, or because they did not word their own

Are you implying that non-US (eg. Australian) developers do not
understand Americanised English?

(remembering of course that Australia is a non-US country, where we
speak real English(TM) ;-) )

grin
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: my answers to questions

2001-03-05 Thread Brian May
 Bdale == Bdale Garbee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Bdale I use computers for a lot of different kinds of tasks.
Bdale While the vast majority of my time is spent on Debian
Bdale systems, I'm not ashamed to use commercial software when
Bdale there is no suitable Open Source solution.  The
Bdale highest-profile examples at home are Quicken and Turbotax
Bdale for my complex personal finances, Cadsoft's Eagle for
Bdale schematic capture and PC board layout (this runs on Linux,
Bdale at least!), and a diverse mix of free and non-free
Bdale development tools for my amateur radio and amateur
Bdale satellite projects.

Would you consider changing to an alternative (eg. gnucash) if/when it
does everything you need/want from it?

Or, would you prefer the stability of using an existing product that
you know to be reliable (assuming this is the case)?
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

2001-02-28 Thread Brian May
 Anthony == Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:

Anthony Hi guys, Some questions, which you might or might not
Anthony like to answer..

I have a question I would like to ask too. Some people may think it is
not relevant to this mailing list, but I have seen complaints that not
enough is being done in this area by the project as a whole.

 * what release of Debian will come standard with IPv6 support?
   woody+1? Woody+2? What goals (if any) should be set along the way?
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]



non-free software question

2000-02-16 Thread Brian May
Hello,

When reading the IRC transcripts for the first question, I was a bit
surprised no-one seemed to mention a new proposal I heard about (from
debian-devel? Sorry, I can't remember right now). Perhaps Ben or
Wichert were hinting towards this, I am not sure.

Anyway, the proposal was instead of having package foo declare
itself to suggest bar, bar would have a reverse suggests that
says it can enhance the functionality of foo. So, if you don't tell
dselect (or whatever) about non-free, these suggests would never show
up.

Or, perhaps package pools offer a better way of dealing with this?

Comments?
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Debate Transcripts

2000-02-16 Thread Brian May
 Jason == Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Jason The raw transcript is a bit hard to read but it is 'more
Jason complete' than the HTML verison which only includes the
Jason candidates responses and not the interm chatter.

Not sure if this is the correct spot, but anyway, I have written a
Perl script that will process the raw transcript into a format that is
a bit more human readable (IMHO).

#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;

my $time;
my $person;
my $message;


format STDOUT_TOP =
Transcript page @
$%
.
format STDOUT = 
@ @ ^
$time, $person, $message
~~  ^
$message
.

while () {
  if (/(\S+)\s+([^]+)\s+(.*)/) {
$time = localtime($1);
$person = $2;
$message = $3;
write;
  }
  elsif (/(\S+)\s+(\*)\s+(.*)/) {
$time = localtime($1);
$person = $2;
$message = $3;
write;
  }
}

Probably can be improved on, but it works (I think) ;-)
-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: README.Why_non-free (Re: Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org )

1999-06-24 Thread Brian May
On Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 09:12:32AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
 
 I lost track of who said what...

Some here. I will probably only post once - I am not really intersted
in this thread, but some issues have caught my eye.

 Without giving legal advice, the package was put into non-free
 for a reason, right?  State the reason.
 
 I wouldn't put it in README.Debian.  I'd put it in a mandatory
 new file for non-free packages called README.Why_non-free
 (contrib packages could have README.Why_contrib).

I would prefer it if it went in as another field in Packages. That
way, when browsing Packages for new packages that I might want to
install, I can quickly see why a non-free package is non-free, and
consider if it is still worth installing - of course, I would
double check the official copyright file after installing it...

 I could then easily find all non-free packages on my system by
 doing
 
 $ locate README.Why_non-free

I think dpkg (or some other package) should provide some mechanism to
automatically list all non-free and/or contrib software installed on a
system. Especially for non-free software I may have installed ages ago,
and never used since...

-- 
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpWvtkW6jCw1.pgp
Description: PGP signature