Re: tag2upload, reproducible .orig and dfsg repacks
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
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
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
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
On 17 October 2014 08:25, Vincent Bernat 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
Re: blablablablablablabla (was Re: lifting censorship during the DPL campaign ...
> 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 -- 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.
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 -- 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
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 -- 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
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
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "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.
>>>>> "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 ...
>>>>> "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 ...
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "martin" == martin f krafft 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
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
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: I cannot vote.
On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 14:22 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > From: Thomas Bushnell > From: BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > So the first of those addresses doesn't have an @ sign, and so fails all > sorts of validation checks. The correct way of doing this, I think, is like > so: Some MTA will attempt to "fix" the above problem and automatically append the local domain, e.g. From: Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED], BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ...just to confuse you even more. -- 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
>>>>> "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. 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? I apologise if this has already been said, I really can't keep up with this thread. -- Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
>>>>> "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. 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? 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: Just a single Question for the Candidates
>>>>> "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]>
Re: Just a single Question for the Candidates
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "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]>
Re: Just a single Question for the Candidates
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns 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: GR: Removal of non-free
>>>>> "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: our users as one of our priorities
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 10:29:37AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote: > #include > * 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
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 10:29:37AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote: > #include > * 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]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: our users as one of our priorities
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: our users as one of our priorities
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: General Resolution draft against spam.
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 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: General Resolution draft against spam.
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 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: Some questions for the DPL candidates
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "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) ;-) ) -- Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: my answers to questions
>>>>> "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
>>>>> "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) ;-) ) -- 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
>>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns 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]>
Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates
>>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debate Transcripts
>>>>> "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]>
non-free software question
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 declare itself to suggest , would have a "reverse suggests" that says it can enhance the functionality of . 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: README.Why_non-free (Re: Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org )
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
