Re: Norman Petry and I (Ossipoff) recommended CSSD, but Schwartz Woodall is a better voting system for Debian

[Kalle Kivimaa]

On 10May, 2013, at 23.40 , Michael Ossipoff  wrote:
> I want to add that I can't find any rule for choosing the numerical value of 
> R.

The quorum R is usually 3 * 1/2 * sqrt( number of Debian Developers ). This is 
currently a bit over 47. Majority is usually a simple majority. See 
Constitution 4.2.4, 4.2.7 and A.3.2.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5c51c638-e5bd-4993-9280-459c559b0...@iki.fi

Re: Gergely and Wouter: on the need of becoming a DPL

[Kalle Kivimaa]

On 13Mar, 2012, at 17:18 , Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:14:43AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
>> Please don't send me personal copies of messages that are also going to
>> the mailing list, as I haven't asked for that.
> 
> Mail-Followup-To can help you with that, fwiw.
> 

From the Debian mailing list Code of Conduct at 
http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/

"When replying to messages on the mailing list, do not send a carbon copy (CC) 
to the original poster unless they explicitly request to be copied."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/90116521-d198-4b76-a149-c5bed53c7...@iki.fi

Re: Finding sponsors for Debian

[Kalle Kivimaa]

On 12.3.2012, at 10.00, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Of course, it's unfortunate that the full details are not available.
> There's been work on making Debian's monetary details more transparent,
> but AFAIK there hasn't been anything made public on that yet. I suppose
> this is something that will require some sort of follow-up with the
> Auditors, who've been working on this.
> 

Well, most of the Debian monetary assets are held by SPI, and the SPI reports 
their assets publicly (the board meeting minutes), so this isn't a huge 
problem. It would be nice if the auditors would release a public yearly 
summary, though.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/56e2c2f4-ac56-45e1-997d-26743a71f...@iki.fi

Re: Question to all Candidates: Who would you vote for?

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Stefano Zacchiroli  writes:
> So, I apologize, but I'm not going to disclose my leader vote in public.

I think the better phrasing for the original question would be:

List reasons why the other candidates would make a good DPL.

This question does not ask you to divulge your potential vote - unless
you can find good reasons for only one candidate :)

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ocidzfw0@inara.killeri.net

Re: Question to all Candidates: Project Funds and donations

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Aníbal Monsalve Salazar  writes:
> At [0] AJ wrote that Martin Michlmayr spoke to Linux Australia about it
> holding money/donations for Debian. So, potentially, LA may/will have
> Debian money.

Thanks, this was news to me - and shows that I should have posted the
list already in 2006...

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87eijmaxet@inara.killeri.net

Re: Question to all Candidates: Project Funds and donations

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Kalle Kivimaa  writes:
> I don't think it is too much of a burden for a Debian volunteer to send
> out quarterly or even monthly emails and then collate the answers. But
> it might be a burden to the trustee organizations. But the only way to
> find out is to ask, of course :)

Forgot to add: tracking the expenses is even easier if the DPL simply
CC's the auditor in each of the expense approval mails (especially
concerning other organizations than the SPI). Then the auditor can
simply keep a running total and publish that periodically. I think the
income statements can easily be quarterly or yearly.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87iq8yay5l@inara.killeri.net

Re: Question to all Candidates: Project Funds and donations

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Stefano Zacchiroli  writes:
> As I wrote before, one thing is a desiderata, one thing is what you can
> get given the available work forces.  Given that you've just stepped
> back from the position (which, honestly, I forgot we had), the first
> obvious step is now finding a new volunteer for the position.

I don't think it is too much of a burden for a Debian volunteer to send
out quarterly or even monthly emails and then collate the answers. But
it might be a burden to the trustee organizations. But the only way to
find out is to ask, of course :)

> - it is limited to the money we have in the SPI bank account. I'm sure
>   most DDs, including yours truly, don't even know exactly how many
>   different organizations we've in the world that hold Debian money

The list of organizations I'm aware of having Debian monies is:

Associação SoftwareLivre.org (Brazil)
Associazione Software Libero (Italy)
Debian UK
Debian Switzerland
Linux-Aktivaattori (Finland)
SPI
Verein zur Förderung Freier Informationen und Software e.V. (Germany)

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxyab0ye@inara.killeri.net

Re: Question to all Candidates: Project Funds and donations

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Stefano Zacchiroli  writes:
> or not.  Note that achieving that is not necessarily easy: it probably
> involves more work on the shoulders of various treasurers and we should
> be ready to help out with that, if it is a blocker.

It isn't that difficult, the only thing that needs to happen is for the
Debian Auditor to do his/her job regularily. Of course, if we want eg.
quarterly reports, then it might add additional burden on the various
treasureres of the organizations holding Debian monies in trust, but a
yearly "monies received / spent / balance" report isn't that hard.

That said, most of the Debian monies are in SPI, which does a nice
monthly report already.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxybngw9@inara.killeri.net

Devotee Improvements (Re: Debian Project Leader Election 2009 Results)

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Would it be possible to add a pointer to the frequently encountered
problems to the devotee error reply? This would most likely reduce the
burden on the secretary during the voting period and allow people to
solve the problems at their end faster.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
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 Results

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Luigi Gangitano  writes:
> You're right. It was my fault not to check the correctness of my
> ballot, but since I've always used this combination of MUA to send my
> votes I have been easily distracted by the warning on unsafe directory
> permissions.

Devotee is actually a nice way to verify your MUA's compliance when
sending non-ASCII PGP mails. I found out a bug in my Gnus
configuration that way (with Manoj's help).

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: [Amendment] Reaffirm current requirements for GR sponsoring

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Kurt Roeckx  writes:
> Anyway, there is also this section in the constitution:
>
>   A.5. Expiry
>
>If a proposed resolution has not been discussed, amended, voted on or
>otherwise dealt with for 4 weeks the secretary may issue a statement
>that the issue is being withdrawn. If none of the sponsors of any of
>the proposals object within a week, the issue is withdrawn.
>
>
> I'm just not sure when that 4 weeks start.  The discussion period
> is now over, so I could do it 4 weeks from now.  I could also
> interprete it to start from the last discussion on the list which
> seems to be March 27.

I don't think the Expiry clause deals with the minimum discussion
period, but actual discussion (note the wording "discussed"). Thus,
the four week period starts with the last actual -vote post on the
subject matter, in this case currently March 27.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Results of the Lenny release GR

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Ean Schuessler  writes:
> Ironically, Bdale *is* warping the results of the vote and applying
> an editorial voice to the interpretation of the results.

Umm, why shouldn't Bdale have his opinion about the results? Nowhere
does it say that the (acting) Secretary is the authority to
interprete GR results (that's not interpreting the Constitution).

The people who do the interpretation are obviously the release team,
with the DPL being the potential sanity checker. 

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Purpose of the Constitution and the Foundation Documents

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Ian Jackson  writes:
>  C. Rewrite the foundation documents so that they are clearly
> comprehensible (rather than vague) and establish an independent
> legally-minded body to make these decisions.
>
>  D. Establish (or empower) some kind of interpretation committee,
> which would have to be elected.

I very much agree with you about the foundation document issue. I
especially would not want either of these alternatives to become the
reality. In my opinion Debian is very averse to decisions by
committees, and uses those only as a last resort for a very small
subset of potential problems (ie. the TC). All other decisions are
made either by individual developers or by the developer body as a
whole (the GR process).

Having a committee to rule on such potentially controversial issues
as the interpretation of the DFSG and the SC would lead to massive
flamewars and GRs after GRs to overrule said committee.

I think we should take a good hard look at this issue, but preferably
only after Lenny is released, so the people working hard to achieve
that goal won't be distracted by another important issue.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
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

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho  writes:
> Doesn't it occur to you that there might be a reason why the Secretary cannot
> be removed by GR or by the Leader's whim?

Actually, the Secretary *can* be removed by a GR. The GR must of
course amend the Constitution at the same time to allow this, so it
needs to be done with a 3:1 majority.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Final call for votes: GR: Project membership procedures

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Holger Levsen  writes:
> On Friday 12 December 2008 12:57, Neil McGovern wrote:
>> ..Unranked choices are considered equally the least desired
>> choices, and ranked below all ranked choices...
>
> Are unrated choices considered equally or ranked below? Or what part of the 
> logic do I miss here?
>
> I mean, if I vote "12  ", are then choices 3+4 ranked as 2. or as 3.?

"considered equally" means that those choises are equal. Then they are
"the least desidered choices", so you'll end up with a vote of "1233"
if you vote "12  ". I don't see anything wrong there.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
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

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ACK about your concerns (and the ones pointed by others, which are roughly
> the same).  Do you have any suggestion on what would be a better approach?

How about dropping the GR and continuing with the current process,
where anybody can file a RC bug against a non-DFSG package, maintainer
(or during the release process, anybody) makes a new package release
moving the package to contrib/non-free, and the ftpmasters do the move
when they get around to it? Alternatively, you can always provide
patches to dak where the priority of the semi-automatically moved
packages is raised to the top of the NEW processing list and a note is
shown to the ftpmaster doing the processing (meaning an almost
automatic Apply override reflex) - remember to check that the source
tar.gz is identical to the existing one, to make it easier to trust
that there's nothing non-distributable trying to sneak in.

Actually, now that I think of it, the process you're suggesting is not
that trivial. The person doing the upload needs to do a dummy new
upstream release to work around the known dak bug, and you need the
new dak functionality outlined above.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

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

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> to bypass the NEW queue.  Not to say we can't pass the GR, but I would
> much rather see something that does not step on those toes.

Well, as per constitution 2.1.1 a GR cannot force any project member
or delegate to do something, so if the GR means what I suspect it
does, it would be just another wishlist bug report against
dak/ftp.debian.org, until a ftpmaster fixes it.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Draft ballot for Proceedural Vote: Suspension of the changes of the Project's membership procedures.

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think option 3 means the same as option 1.  The decision stands and we
> can later overrule it by a full GR if we want.  Or does option 1 mean that
> we'll also have this 2 week discussion period followed by a full GR?

It's the reverse. The sponsorship of 2K people automatically put the
DAM decision on hold, and the vote needs to override that automation.
Thus the FD choice is the same as the "decision stays on hold".

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Secretary? Delegate?

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Or is Manoj is still the secretary and did he delegate something to you?
> What got delegated exactly in that case?

See http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/07/msg4.html

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

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

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>   The action of moving it may be performed by any of the developers

Is this GR trying to force the dak developers to implement a way for
this to be done without any intervention from the ftpmasters, or is
this just shorthand for "any developer may make a NMU moving the
package to non-free, which the ftpmasters should handle as a priority
item"?

What if the ftpmasters won't move the package?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Proposed amendment: Resolving DFSG violations

[Kalle Kivimaa]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I propose to amend the Robert's resolution by adding the following choice
> ---
> The Debian project, recognizing that bugs do not fix themselves,
> applauds Ben Hutchings's efforts to remove non-DFSG-conformant bits from
> the linux-2.6 package in a way that is still making users a priority. It
> instructs the project leader to authorize spending of Debian funds to
> send a box of chocolates to Ben.
> ---

Seconded.

- -- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 

iEYEARECAAYFAkkCvKgACgkQdPhr0GcNBZ2qUQCgkZIthPQ1ISm50+YsQSATWgQ0
PwEAn0fX0pK+0FToaS/0NZFDlgUCKLhD
=HxB1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

Re: Call for seconds: Suspension of the changes of the Project's membership procedures.

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, maybe you want. This would make it impossible to change the
> membership procedures without an GR.

I don't think so. I think that would require (temporarily) amending
the constitution, as it would (temporarily) remove the authority
defined there.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Would it be a good compromise between SCs #1, #3 and #4 if we made an
exhaustive list of non-free bits in main, and make it our goal that the
list gets smaller between each release and not to add anything to
that list?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Constitutional amendment: reduce the length of DPL election process

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No. And that's a good thing.

Actually, *if* each and every developer formally seconds the
resolution, I think the secretary could forego the actual voting
procedure as blatantly obvious.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: The Debian Maintainers GR

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Could you just read the long email I just sent a few hours ago? You
> replied to it, so I assume you have noticed it, but somehow I get the
> impression that you didn't actually have a look at the content.

I guess I misunderstood this comment:

"(2) As soon as someone is in the DM keyring, a DD can give him upload
rights for virtually every package by adding the DM to the Uploaders
field and adding the DM-Upload-Allowed field."

I understood it to mean "virtually every package in the archive",
whereas you probably meant "virtually every package the DD maintains".
Sorry for the confusion. I don't actually have any quarrel over your
(other) points about sponsorship.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: The Debian Maintainers GR

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, I'm not. Is it so hard to imagine that a DM could maintain (adopt,
> co-maintain, ...) something and still do a horrible job?

It isn't. But, as this is no worse situation than we currently have
with sponsoring, I don't really see it as a showstopper, unless you
suggest we should restrict sponsoring, as well.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: The Debian Maintainers GR

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No. "DD moron allows DM moron to upload crappy packages, noone
> notices". I'm amazed that you fail to see a problem.

Ah, you're saying that a Joe R. Developer doesn't care to take a look
at the changes when some random developer does an NMU on his package.
Does this really happen, and if yes, what steps have been taken to
educate those developers?

I for one do take a look at the changes when I'm NMU'd.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: The Debian Maintainers GR

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not saying that the DD is malicious, but simply a moron. That
> happens more often, really.

OK, the DD is a moron and marks a random package X as a DM-allowed by
doing a NMU. Maintainer of X notices this and does an immediate upload
which removes the flag. I fail to see a big problem here, unless the
moron continues the ping-pong, which would be grounds for expulsion, I
guess.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: The Debian Maintainers GR

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>  (i) You have added a policy for everything, but removal from the DM list
>  is still under-defined. This is a crappy idea. Imagine a Sven Luther

Under-defined? It lists two criteria for "forceful" removal: request
from the DAM and request from multiple developers. OK, it doesn't say
how many are multiple, but I don't think that qualifies as
under-defined.

OK, after going back and reading your previous mail, it seems that you
want rigid rules for removal. Would you be happy if the proposal said?

"at least ten Debian developers have requested the individual's
removal for any reason"

That is a very specific rule that takes care of most every situation,
I would think (if you cannot get 10 developers to support you, you
could still try get the DAM's support), without being too easy to
abuse.

>  case in DM - someone who's technically capable and invests a lot of
>  time, but leads to regular flamewars. There is no question that
>  we would need to have some procedure to decide what should happen
>  in such cases. Now, back to the Sven Luther example: Imagine how
>  *that* flamewar would look if the procedure to kick him out would
>  have been hand-crafted just for his case?

I'm assuming about 10 developers would have mailed the DM Keyring
team, and I'd say 10 qualifies as "multiple". Yes, there would have
been the usual flamewar, but it wouldn't have mattered if there was a
very specific policy or not.

>(2) As soon as someone is in the DM keyring, a DD can give him
>upload rights for virtually every package by adding the DM to
>the Uploaders field and adding the DM-Upload-Allowed field.

If there is a malicious DD who wants to do that, what would stop that
DD from creating an automated system that accepts packages from the
DM, signs them and sends them into the upload queue?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: On the "Debian Maintainers" GR

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> arguments in favor of DM the more it's about introverted geeks, and
> uncoordinated work. Maybe we should care more about people that are nice
> to users rather about introverted guys that do not care about the rest
> of the world, shouldn't we ?

I find this comment highly offensive. I'm assuming you are (in part)
referring to me, and although I am both introverted and a geek, I do
believe I care about the rest of the world.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: On the "Debian Maintainers" GR

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>   I still lack the reason why someone would not be DD for political
> reasons _and_ wanting to help improving Debian at the same time.

For an example and reasoning, please see the subthread starting with
http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2007/06/msg00084.html

Short recap: a DD might not like the direction the project is taking,
but still willing to maintain some packages.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: On the "Debian Maintainers" GR

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Nacho Barrientos Arias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The above is the ideal situation, but if it is not possible then the
> DM starts making sense and I will support it.

You do realize that the DM proposal solves other problems than just
the "it takes forever for a qualified NM to get upload rights", too?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

[Kalle Kivimaa]

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How can anyone second that in its current state?  It's rather buggy.
> I like the idea, but please withdraw your seconds until the worst bugs
> are fixed.  If that passes as-is, the project will look sillier.

I don't agree that the language mistakes in the proposal would make
the project look silly. I'm willing to second the proposal with your
changes (I personally don't see a reason for the Jetring developers to
have commit access, but it really isn't a pressing point for me,
considering who those developers are at the moment), though, but you
haven't proposed it and aj hasn't adopted any of your suggested changes.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

[Kalle Kivimaa]

I second the following proposal (by my count it is still missing at
least two seconds, if anybody is interested in seconding).

 Debian Maintainers Proposal 

The Debian Project endorses the concept of "Debian Maintainers" with
limited access, and resolves to 

1) A new keyring will be created, called the "Debian maintainers keyring".
   It will be initially maintained in alioth subversion using the jetring
   tool, with commit priveleges initially assigned to:

* the Debian Account Managers (Joerg Jaspert, James Troup)
* the New-maintainer Front Desk (Christoph Berg, Marc Brockschmidt, 
  Brian Nelson)
* the FTP masters (James Troup, Ryan Murray, Anthony Towns)
* the Debian Keyring maintenaners (James Troup, Michael Beattie)
* the Jetring developers (Joey Hess, Anthony Towns, Christoph Berg)

   The team will be known as the Debian Maintainer Keyring team. Changes
   to the team may be made by the DPL under the normal rules for
   delegations.

   The keyring will be packaged for Debian, and regularly uploaded
   to unstable.

2) The initial policy for an individual to be included in the keyring
   will be:

* that the applicant acknowledges Debian's social contract, 
  free software guidelines, and machine usage policies.

* that the applicant provides a valid gpg key, signed by a
  Debian developer (and preferably connected to the web of
  trust by multiple paths).

* that at least one Debian developer (preferable more) is willing
  to advocate for the applicant's inclusion, in particular to the
  fact that the applicant is technically competent and good to work
  with.

   All additions to the keyring will be publicly announced to the
   debian-project list.

3) The initial policy for removals for the keyring will be under any of the
   following circumstances:

* the individual has become a Debian developer
* the individual has not annually reconfirmed their interest
* multiple Debian developers have requested the individual's
  removal for non-spurious reasons; eg, due to problematic
  uploads, unfixed bugs, or being unreasonably difficult to
  work with.
* the Debian Account Managers have requested the individual's
  removal for any reason.

4) The initial policy for Debian developers who wish to advocate
   a potential Debian maintainer will be:

* Developers should take care in who they choose to advocate,
  particularly if they have not successfully participated as an
  Application Manager, or in other mentoring roles. Advocacy should
  only come after seeing the individual working effectively within
  Debian, both technically and socially.

* Advocacy messages should be posted to debian-newmaint or
  other relevant public mailing list, and a link to that mail
  provided with the application.

* If a developer repeatedly advocates individuals who cause
  problems and need to be removed, the Debian Maintainer Keyring
  team may stop accepting advocacy from that developer. If the
  advocacy appears to be malicious or particularly careless, the
  Debian Account Managers may consider removing that developer
  from the project.

5) The intial policy for the use of the Debian Maintainer keyring with the
   Debian archive will be to accept uploads signed by a key in that keyring
   provided:

* none of the uploaded packages are NEW

* the Maintainer: field of the uploaded .changes file matches the
  key used (ie, maintainers may not sponsor uploads)

* none of the packages are being taken over from other source packages

* the most recent version of the package uploaded to unstable
  or experimental lists the uploader in the Maintainer: or Uploaders:
  fields (ie, cannot NMU or hijack packages)

* the usual checks applied to uploads from Debian developers pass

6) The initial relationship to the existing new-maintainer (n-m) procedure
   will be as an independent means of contributing to Debian. This means,
   among other things, that:

* Applicants in the n-m queue may choose to apply to be a Debian
  maintainer while finishing their application or waiting for
  it to be accepted.

* Individuals may apply to the n-m process, and pass through it
  without becoming a Debian maintainer at any point.

* Individuals may apply to become a Debian Maintainer without being
  in the n-m queue, or having any intention of joining the n-m queue.

* Appication Managers may advocate their n-m applicants but
  are not required to. They may decide to only advocate applicants
  who have passed some (or all) of the T&S or P&P checks.

7) There is no initial policy or plans for use 

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Benjamin BAYART <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Le Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 09:01:51PM +0200, Sven Luther:
>> First, my mail won't reach the list, since i am currently being unfairly
>> censored and banned from posting on debian lists, so if you judge this
>> mail worthwhile, you can forward it.
>
> Uh?

Sven has been banned from the Debian mailing lists because of his
constant disruptive behaviour. See the relevant announcements by the
DAMs and the listmasters, if you want more details.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Joey Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm.  By continueing to maintain your packages but losing voting rights
> you would still be part of the community but without the slightest chance
> to change anything.  I guess, I didn't get your rationale.  Err... Care
> to help me?

I do admit that my way of thinking here might be very different from
the rest of the DD's.

I feel that if I'm a voting member, I am more or less responsible for
all the actions taken by the developer body, ie. the GR's and
elections. Of course, most GR's and elections where my opinion loses
are such that I can still live with the winning opinion. There are
some opinions in the project, however, that I could not live with if
they were endorsed by the project.

If I'm not part of the community, I'm freed of that responsibility.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> like that culture. As a matter of fact, I'd be offended if someone would 
> conclude that I underwrite e.g. flamewars because I'm a DD.

Let me take a not-entirely hypothetical example. Let's suppose that
the DAM's have decided to expel a developer who is socially disruptive
but technically very adept. A group of developers are unhappy with the
expulsion and they start a GR to reinstate the expelled developer. The
GR goes through.

Now, we would have a very clear statement from the project saying that
it is OK to be a social idiot if you are technically competent enough.
If I wouldn't resign, I would feel like I'd too support the decision,
even if I voted against it.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then we maybe just disagree here: I think that someone who opposes to 
> Debian-the-community so much that they would want to explicitly disassociate 
> themselves from the entire project, is not someone I would want to grant 
> upload rights.

I personally do feel that there are two distinct parts. First, there
is the Debian archive, which is governed by our Social Contract.
Second, there is the social community, ie. mailing lists and IRC,
which isn't part of the SC. Now, if I don't like the direction the
social community is going, but still want to uphold the SC, should I
be able to somehow retain my upload rights without being part of the
social community?

I'm not saying that the right answer is "yes, I should". The social
community is just as big a part of the project as the technical part,
so saying "take both or none" is just as valid an answer.

> I see no reason to vote for a proposal that facilitates people who
> explicitly denounce Debian to be granted rights to the same Debian.

My personal opinion back then was more ot denounce the direction of
the social community, not Debian as a Linux distribution. I feel these
two are different.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

[Kalle Kivimaa]

[I am on the list and I thought my m-f-t is set correctly too, no need
to cc me on replies]

Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can you be a bit more verbose as to why you could not just refrain
> from using some rights that a DD has?

I was close to resigning because I thought the Debian community was
taking active steps to a wrong direction. I wouldn't have wanted to be
a part of such a community, even though I would have liked to continue
contributing to the technical project. As such, I would not have
wanted to have the voting rights.

That's more or less the gist of my view, feel free to ask for a more
elaborate statement.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think I agree with you. I can see some use in the DM proposal for
> people on the way in to Debian, but not for those on the way out. I'd
> much rather see a clean break for those people leaving - if people
> have decided they no longer want to be DD then why continue to develop
> for Debian?

Recently I was thinking about resigning as a DD but still wanting to
continue maintaining the few packages I have. Had that happened I
would very much have liked to have something like DM available,
instead of having to pester some other DD whenever I would need to
upload.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


-- 
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

[Kalle Kivimaa]

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2. However, Sven Luther should be allowed onto lists where Q posters
> request it, where Q is half of the square root of the number of
> posters last month.

Does this place an undue burden on the listmasters?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: A question to the Debian community ...

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The expulsion procedure calls for such statements to be sent to both the
> DAMs and to -private.  So it's reasonable to discount mails from developers
> who didn't follow directions, isn't it?

Yes. OTOH the procedure also calls for such statements to contain
(new) reasoning for or against the expulsion. I didn't have anything
new to add to the reasonings (either for or against) so, as per the
procedure, I didn't send a "me too!" email. So, counting the
statements on -private only tells us that X developers were for it
and Y against. We cannot say that X/(X+Y) of all developers were for
and Y/(X+Y) against.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to all candidates: Release importance, release blockers, release quality

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When you are in a visible position in a group, you are also in the
> position to be mocked, and it's something people should get used to.

This attitude is the very single one that I absolutely hate in
volunteer organizations. Why should you get mocked for doing things
you like with no compensation? What moral right do the mockers have?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to all candidates: Release importance, release blockers, release quality

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I understand your opinion, Greg Folkert's way of criticising people
> is acceptable, while Sam's is not. Is that correct?

I don't have a ready-made opinion on either Greg or Sam, I haven't
really read that many opinions by either. I took a quick look at
-project and -devel for the last month and I personally would say that
in the Linus/Gnome thread, Greg was at least close to being mocking,
especially in his last post. Sam didn't have any really
confrontational posts on those two lists last month, but I did find
his Etch release stress-o-meter potentially crossing the line.

So, I cannot really give you a blanket statement on either Greg's or
Sam's way of arguing, sorry. I'm not really sure what purpose that
kind of a statement would serve, but if you really want an answer for
me, please give me some detailed examples.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to all candidates: Release importance, release blockers, release quality

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Sam Hocevar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Does your "no compensation" clarification mean that it is not as
> unacceptable to mock people for doing things they like if they do get
> compensated?

Well, if *I* get compensated enough, I'm willing to be mocked :) So
yes, I find it somewhat more acceptable.

As a semi-RL example, I've been thinking about a game fee for sports
officials: travel costs plus 20 euros per each insult from a player,
coach or a spectator. I would get rich pretty quick...

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to all candidates: Release importance, release blockers, release quality

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm getting pissed off by this attitude of many free software
> developers, who think that no one has the right to criticise their work,
> because they are volunteers.

Criticise, yes. Mock, no.

I'll define the terms, just to be clear:

Criticise: To discuss the merits or demerits of a thing or person;
esp., to find fault. [Webster]

Mock: To make sport in contempt; to speak in a scornful or jeering
manner. [Webster]

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm confused.  In your other mail you wrote

I think you find that *I* wrote what you quoted after this.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Finally, I'm curious - where do you stand on these issues?

Well, I guess I should send this as a private email to Steve, but
considering that most of the candidates have answered these already,
here are my personal opinions :)

>>What is the role of the DPL? Is he a strong leader, who uses his

I feel that in a volunteer project you actually could have any of the
three kinds of leaders I listed, with everybody being more or less
happy. E.g. in my local Red Cross chapter we had a very strong
chairman a few years back, who got things very much done her way, with
very little opposition. Currently I'm the chairman and I try to be a
figurehead and a facilitator, and things seem to work just as fine.

I just wanted to hear what type of leader you all would be :)

>>Do you feel that the DPL is first and foremost The Debian Project
>>Leader, in the sense that anything Debian-related the DPL does, he
>>does so as the DPL, not as a DD or a private person?

My belief is that the DPL hat is something you can take off. Of
course, the DPL must be very explict in this, but if I take the
dunc-tank issue, which sparked my question, I think aj handled it not
that badly. Maybe he could have been more clear but he most certainly
had the moral right to be involved in dunc-tank.

>>There are problems with communication between some key teams and
>>the rest of the project. What solutions will you try to implement
>>during the next year?

I personally have had very little to do with our core teams, and I
raised this question solely based on the -project discussions by
others, who find (some of) the core teams silent and unresponsive. So,
again, I was just curious to hear your thoughts :)

>>How do you feel about spending Debian monies into buying core
>>infrastructure support?

Again, question inspired by others. I personally don't think we would
be any better off hiring administrators, we are doing just fine with
our volunteer effort.

>>Currently just about every single conversation on -project and
>>-vote degenerates immediately into a (minor) flame war. What will you
>>do to fix the current atmosphere?

I feel very strongly that the current mailing list atmosphere is more
or less intolerable. I've actually considered resigning from the
project (not a big loss, I have a couple of not-that-important
packages and you can always find a better Auditor), as reading just
-project and -vote makes me sad at the level of "discussion". But, I
think I'll give the new DPL a couple of months to try to find out ways
to improve.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am *sick* of that assimilation of people against dunc-tank being those
> who feel DDs can't be paid. Just stop the FUD.

Well, a brief look at the archives produced these exhibits:

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/10/msg00100.html
[2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/10/msg00060.html

So, although it is false to say that all people against Dunc-Tank are
against DDs being paid, I'd say that it is correct to say that some of
the people against Dunc-Tank are against (some, not all) DDs being
paid. The latter was what I meant, sorry if I was (again) unclear. I
need to work on my email writing skills.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>   I absolutely don't like the implications of that assertion.

Well, if an entity A feels that they would benefit from paying a DD
for his Debian work, they have two choices:

1. They can do it publicly, or
2. They can just work the details out with the DD and not announce
   this anywhere.

Doing #1 entails taking a lot of heat from those DD's who feel that
paying DD's is a no-no. How many entities want to have their name
associated with postings like the ones we had with the Dunc-Tank
experiment?

The solution, of course, is to have a mailing list environment where
payment announcements would be welcomed, not flamed. I'm not sure how
we could achieve this. Ideas?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: One more question to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 10:31:29AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
>> Forgot to ask this question: In your opinion, what is a good length of
>> total term for a DPL?
>
> I have always thought that a one-year term might be too short, since it
> does not allow for too much action by the DPL. However, I never felt
> strongly enough about this to actually take the necessary steps to
> increase the term.

I was unclear again. I meant, "how many times will you seek
re-election if you are re-elected?"

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

One more question to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Forgot to ask this question: In your opinion, what is a good length of
total term for a DPL?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

"Gustavo Franco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I will add your questions and my answers into my campaign page, ok?

Yes, all candidates (and others, too) may consider my post as a whole
and as individual questions as being licensed under BSD license,
without any attribution clauses, or alternatively as being in public
domain, whichever is the least restrictive licensing scheme in the
licensee's jurisdiction :)

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Vote page ISO 8859-1 but contains UTF-8?

[Kalle Kivimaa]

(I'm not subscribed to debian-www, so if you trim this to exclude
-vote, please cc me)

At http://www.debian.org/vote/2007/vote_001 I noticed that Raphaél's
name is written with the UTF-8 é, and the page itself defines the
charset to be ISO 8859-1. Is this an artefact of the WWW pages or
a simple typo in the vote page?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So your question is "What about paying people to have first-class support
> on some of our core infrastructure", is that correct ?

Exactly, thanks for a better wording.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Questions to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can you give more specific examples of what could be the "core
> infrastructure support" ?

Feel free to include/exclude any infrastructure you like, but just to
give an example, how about our buildd network administration (and no,
I'm not saying that our buildd network isn't administered up to par,
but there are quite a few developers who have said so)?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Questions to the candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Now that we are well into the campaigning period, I'd like to ask each
candidate a couple of questions. Feel free to say that "this is
answered in my platform", if that is the case.

What is the role of the DPL? Is he a strong leader, who uses his
position to Get Things Done His Way, a public figurehead, who just
Speaks For The Project, a mediator, who tries to solve internal
squabbles, or something else?

Do you feel that the DPL is first and foremost The Debian Project
Leader, in the sense that anything Debian-related the DPL does, he
does so as the DPL, not as a DD or a private person?

There are problems with communication between some key teams and
the rest of the project. What solutions will you try to implement
during the next year?

How do you feel about spending Debian monies into buying core
infrastructure support?

Currently just about every single conversation on -project and
-vote degenerates immediately into a (minor) flame war. What will you
do to fix the current atmosphere?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: BREAKING NEWS: Debian developers aren't trusted

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> May I suggest you start using a MUA with threading support? It should
> provide access to the original source easily.

If you had checked the mail headers you would have noticed that I do
use such a MUA. What I don't do is store the Debian mailing list mails
(as they are well archived by Debian), which does prevent me from
accessing the old Debian list mails via the threading capability.

Should really fix my MUA to use the lists.debian.org archives. If
somebody has already done this to Gnus, plese email me.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: BREAKING NEWS: Debian developers aren't trusted

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The context doesn't make the above quote any more pleasant.

Well, in an ideal world everybody trusts everybody, but unfortunately
the world we live in is not ideal. And I'm not sure what's so
newsworthy in the fact that one developer doesn't trust another,
unless you think that a DPL should trust every DD.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: [GR] DD should be allowed to perform binary-only uploads

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Which is interesting, considering that in such a situation we might
> not even be able to run a vote.

To block a vote you need both the Project Secretary and the chairman
of the ctte to act together. Even then the body of the ctte could
simply elect a new chairman, so in effect you need the PS and a
majority of the ctte, including the chairman, to block a vote.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: BREAKING NEWS: Debian developers aren't trusted

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Personally, I don't like either of the checks, but I've seen zero
>> effort from Aurelian and friends to demonstrate they can be trusted,

Quoting partial sentences without disclosing the original source is
what usually only the yellow press does. I don't trust the "news" they
report.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: First call for vote on immediate vote under section 4.2.2

[Kalle Kivimaa]

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> outweigh a screaming crowd in the IETF process.  We have seen reasoned
> objections to several DPL decisions, yet the screaming crowd is used to
> drown out calls for consensus.  This DPL hasn't even looked for rough
> consensus on some issues, as far as I've seen.

Which issues would those be, then?

If I look at the controversial issues aj has rised, I find these
three:

1. Sven vs. the rest of the d-i team mediation
2. Using project funds to pay some developers
3. Revoking the policy editor delegation

In #1 aj was explicitly asked to make a decision by a party in the
controversy. In #2 aj first solicited opinions and then decided *not*
to go forward. #3 was a snap judgement based on the behaviour of a
delegate and it looks like aj is already reconsidering it.

So, we have one issue that aj was forced to take action on, one issue
that he acted on exactly as the constitution states, and one that IMO
did require fast action, and I'd say that the consensus on policy
changes is that no one developer should be able to make normative
changes without peer review.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Proposal to delay the decition of the DPL of the withdrawal of the Package Policy Committee delegation

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Debian Project Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sorry, that is not the intended ruling. The ruling was in
>  answer to a query about a random group of undelegated developers
>  changing policy, which would be unconstitutional.

OK, so the constitution allows the DPL to delegate any authority to a
delegate? Ie. the DPL could delegate somebody to overrule developers
on technical actions (6.1.4) or adjudicate disputes about
interpretation of the constitution (7.1.3). I did read the
constitution so that the DPL may not delegate authority that belongs
to somebody else according to the constitution.

I did think that you were referring to a future DPL delegation when
you answered to aj, but I guess you were referring to the REJECT.

aj:
> As per that interpretation, I've added a REJECT for uploads of
> debian-policy. I won't be looking into formally creating a new
> delegation 'til after etch has released, at which point I hope we
> can find at least four people who'll be active in maintaining policy
> according to the policy process we've had for quite some time.

manoj:
>This presupposes that you have either managed to change the
> constitution, or replaced the secretary with one whose views are in
> line with yours -- since under current wording of the constitution,
> that would be unconstitutional.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Proposal to delay the decition of the DPL of the withdrawal of the Package Policy Committee delegation

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Martin Wuertele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I disagree with the Policy delegation decision of our DPL [1] and
> therefore propose a resolution as defined in section 4.2.2 of the Debian
> constitution to delay the decision of the Debian Project Leader keeping
> the Package Policy Committee as defined[2] in place until the Debian
> Project Leader has found at least three people "who'll be active in
> maintaining policy according to the policy process"[3] and delegates
> them. Consequently the REJECT for uploads of debian-policy must be
> removed.

Actually, we really cannot vote on this as such, as the Secretary has
already ruled [1] that the DPL has no power to delegate the
responsibility for the policy manual, as that would contradict the
powers of the Technical Committee. So, AIUI any vote should first be
taken on the ruling on the constitution, as I don't think we can force
the DPL (or the ftpmasters) to take an unconstitutional action.

We can of course force the DPL to allow the TC members to have upload
access to debian-policy.

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2006/10/msg00164.html

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Asking for the ban of Frans Pop from debian-vote ...

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then we sure can require that he asks a third party to read and forward his
> mails. Or he can show proper behaviour, and not take ad-hominem (even
> disguised ones) attacks against posters holding opinion he disaproves of.

For the record, if either the DPL or the listmasters do apply any
technical measures to prevent *any* DD (including both Sven and Frans)
from posting directly to -vote, I will immediately propose a GR to
hold and overrule that action. Fortunately, I think our current DPL
and listmasters are sane enough not to do this.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: [AMENDMENT] Now is not the time to decide on firmware issue

[Kalle Kivimaa]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I'm seconding the following amendment made by Frans Pop
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

>  START OF AMENDMENT ==
> Considering that:
>(1) The current discussion about what to do with sourceless firmware
>is muddled by other discussions and time pressure because of the
>release of Etch.
>(2) The subject matter is extremely complex and most developers probably
>do not have a clear understanding of what (sub)categories of files
>are involved, what legal and practical issues are associated with
>each of them, and what implications a decision on them will have for
>e.g. the usability of the Debian installation system, nor what long
>term implications a decision may have for the project as a whole.
>
> The Debian Project:
>(a) Affirms that the project strives for and encourages 100 percent
>free software, including the availability of source for all types
>of files.
>(b) Resolves that the project needs more time before a decision can be
>made on how sourceless firmware or other types of files (such as,
>but not limited to, logos, images and video) are to be dealt with.
>(c) Requests the DPL to delegate developers to prepare position papers on
>the legal and practical issues surrounding these types of files in
>view of both of the project's chief priorities: "free software" and
>"our users".
>These papers are to be presented to the project for discussion two
>weeks before Debconf 7 and should include:
>* a classification of the different types of files involved;
>* a summary of legal issues with regard to the different types of
>  files;
>* alternative technical solutions for dealing with different types
>  of files, e.g. in the archive and in the installation system;
>* a statement about whether or not changes are needed/wanted in the
>  project's foundation documents in order to realize the proposed
>  solutions and possibly a proposal for these changes.
>(d) Requests the DPL to facilitate the work of these teams by providing
>access to legal counsel and other resources.
> = END OF AMENDMENT ===

- -- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 

iD8DBQFFGVQukuYKi19tgBURAhD7AJoDtDoXUlInvUls+zrTl8g8g32oUACgstmc
PNbBNyBHFwO77YNItZontZc=
=3bBr
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

Re: GR proposal : Freeze of the GR process until the etch release, hoping tempers will have calmed down by then.

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>   In order to not distract our developpers from
>   their technical work and the timely release of 
>   etch, the GR voting procedure, both currently
>   ongoing and future, will be frozen until the 
>   release of etch, hoping that tempers will have 
>   calmed until then.

This would of course need a supermajority to pass as it temporarily
modifies the Constitution.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Counter-proposal: reaffirm support for the elected DPL

[Kalle Kivimaa]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I'm still seconding Loïc Minier's (typo-corrected) proposal:

- --
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.

The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named "Dunc-Tank", lead by
Anthony Towns, the current DPL, and Steve Mc Intyre, the Second in Charge.
  However, this particular experiment is not the result of a decision of the
Debian Project.

The Debian Project wishes success to projects funding Debian or helping
towards the release of Etch.
- --

- -- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 

iD8DBQFFElJ0kuYKi19tgBURAkWIAJ9fnEtff51y3dmyAalvdGmHb4FPqwCfU2yy
zXeKjaYryx6YQIa94PsE1DA=
=WiHs
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

Re: Has the asset tracking GR been reviewed by a lawyer

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Sam Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, I'm concerned that the model we propose moving to may be much
> more dubious from a legal standpoint.  Basically I'm not sure, and
> without a legal review I'm sure I can't support it.

Could you state what concerns you have? I don't think there can be any
legal concerns, as Debian is a non-legal entity anyway, so any
concerns are moral (legal entities really using the money as agreed,
even though they are not bound by a contract).

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Filibustering general resolutions

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Instead, after 4-6 weeks beyond the date of the priginal
>  proposal, allow for 4*K developers to cut the proposal time short
>  (say, impose a deadline of now + 2 weeks). This means not only that
>  the interval is large, but a number of developers also feel that the
>  resolution is being stalled deliberately.

I agree with Manoj that fixing the holes in the Constitution is a good
thing, and I find Manoj's suggestion above a good solution to the
(potential) problem. Manoj, are you going to write this out as a GR
sometime soonish?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Counter-proposal: reaffirm support for the elected DPL

[Kalle Kivimaa]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I'm seconding the following proposal made by Loïc Minier:

- -
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.

The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named "Duck Tank", lead by
Anthony Towns, the current DPL, and Steve Mc Intyre, the Second in Charge.
  However, this particular experiment is not the result of a decision of the
Debian Project.

The Debian Project wishes success to projects funding Debian or helping
towards the release of Etch.
- -

- -- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 

iD8DBQFFEk7wkuYKi19tgBURAlUgAJ42SY3MJfiTOBwjBJvjqsSUJosjIACdFYug
LbgshjS9xiedFMAwhyPDsmc=
=oIzC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

Re: Firmware

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Joseph Neal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> These results are meaningless. I'll leave it to others to decide if

The results are not meaningless. They do reflect the opinion of those
who participated on the poll. Saying that the results reflect the
opinion of either the project or the users as a whole would be wrong
(or well, the error margin would be huge).

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Firmware & Social Contract: GR proposal

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In my opinion, a project like Debian is never ready, and never perfect.
> Everybody knows that we are not meeting the freedom goals in the SC to
> 100% (as well as other goals)[1].  But I do not see this as a failure,
> rather as a challenge.  So why not try to explain this to the people,
> instead of lowering our standards?  We don't lower our standards with
> respect to software quality or security support, either, even if we do
> miss our goals.

I think the question aj is asking is should the SC be a requirement or
an ideal. If it is a requirement, then we cannot release etch if we
fail to reach it. If it is an ideal, then we can release etch saying
that we are still behind our ideal in some respects.

I think the SC is a requirement and if we knowingly continue to break
it, it sends a bad message to our users.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Amendment: special exception for firmware because of technical limitations

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Given the latest mail from Anthony Towns ("Firmware & Social Contract:
> GR proposal"), it looks like I was correct. He just try to stop this
> GR by proposing his own one.

The DPL has the same right as the other developers to propose GR's
that he feels are the correct ones. I fail to see why this would be
bad, but if you think that a DPL should not have that power (during
his/her term), feel free to suggest a GR to change the Constitution :)

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project

[Kalle Kivimaa]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

[-project dropped]

I second the proposal below.

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Yet another draft. There are major changes in this version, so
>  I think we'll need to have people who seconded re-second  the version
>  that comes out of this discussion. 
>
> Changes: 
> + Clarify developer powers to indicate that they can make as well as
>   override delegate decisions (of course, no one can be forced to do
>   any work, but the decisions can be made by GR).  So actions can't be
>   prevented by a delegate deciding not to decide ...
> + If the developers pass a GR about assets, the DPL need not be consulted
> + Clarify that decisions about assets need not be discussed on a
>   mailing list, they just need to be communicated to the
>   developers. However, major expenditures should be proposed and
>   discussed n an electronic mailing list before funds are disbursed.
> + Made editing the list of trusted organizations a DPL power, added a
>   2 week discussion period before an organization is added to that
>   list. 
> + In case the DPL and ex-secretary can't agree on an candidate for new
>   secretary, the decision is made by the developers in a GR, and not by
>   the SPI board.
> + Removed mention of SPI obligations and undertakings from the
>   constitution. 
>
> manoj
>
> Hi,
>
>
> manoj
>
> 
>  4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election
>4.1. Powers
> Together, the Developers may:
>
> -   3. Override any decision by the Project Leader or a Delegate.
> -   4. Override any decision by the Technical Committee, provided they
> -  agree with a 2:1 majority.
>
> -6. Together with the Project Leader and SPI, make decisions about
> -   property held in trust for purposes related to Debian. (See §9.1.)
>
> 
>  4. The Developers by way of General Resolution or election
>4.1. Powers
> Together, the Developers may:
> +   3. Make or override any decision authorised by the powers of the Project 
> +  Leader or a Delegate.
> +   4. Make or override any decision authorised by the powers of the 
> Technical 
> +  Committee, provided they agree with a 2:1 majority.
>
> +6. Make decisions about property held in trust for purposes
> +   related to Debian. (See §9.).  
> +7. In case of a disagreement between the project leader and in
> +   the incumbent secretary, appoint a new secretary.
> -
>
> 
>  5. Project Leader
>5.1. Powers
> The Project Leader may:
> -   10. Together with SPI, make decisions affecting property held in trust
> -   for purposes related to Debian. (See §9.)
>
> ===
>  5. Project Leader
>5.1. Powers
> The Project Leader may:
> +   10. In consultation with the developers, make decisions affecting
> +   property held in trust  for purposes related to Debian. (See
> +   §9.). Such decisions are announced on an electronic mailing 
> +   list designated by the Project Leader or their Delegate(s), 
> +   which is accessible to all developers.  Major expenditures 
> +   should be proposed and debated on the mailing list before
> +   funds are disbursed.
> +   11. Add or remove organizations from the list of trusted
> +   organizations (see §9.3) that are authorized to accept and
> +   hold assets for Debian. The evaluation and discussion leading
> +   up to such a decision occurs on an electronic mailing list
> +   designated by the Project Leader or their Delegate(s), on
> +   which any developer may post. There is a minimum discussion
> +   period of twoo weeks before an organization may be added to
> +   the list of trusted organizations.
> ---
> ---
> 7. The Project Secretary
>   7.2. Appointment
>If the Project Leader and the current Project Secretary cannot agree
> -  on a new appointment they must ask the board of SPI (see §9.1.) to
> -  appoint a Secretary.
> ===
> 7. The Project Secretary
>   7.2. Appointment
>If the Project Leader and the current Project Secretary cannot agree
> +  on a new appointment, they must ask the Developers by way of
> +  General Resolution to appoint a Secretary.
> ---
>
> 
> -9. Software in the Public Interest
>
> S

Auditing project assets (Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project)

[Kalle Kivimaa]

[-project readers, we've been discussing how to audit various Debian
assets around the world on -vote]

Anthony Towns  writes:
> I suspect getting Europe done first, then SPI in October, then getting
> around to all the other groups (Linux Australia, Debian Japan, various
> latin american groups, etc) would make a lot of sense.

This sounds like a good plan.

> Should we move this discussion to -project? What information would you
> like to get from me, and how? (either historical, in so far as I have it,
> or ongoing authorisations/etc)

Yes, this should stay in -project. If I start with monetary assets, I
think I first would like to have data on authorizations that have been
going on this year.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anthony Towns  writes:
> But actually getting the information isn't so easy -- SPI aren't going

Yes, this is the hard part, as it requires the goodwill of the various
treasureres of the existing (SPI) and new organizations.

> So -- if you're still interested, where to from here?

I think I need to talk with the current SPI treasurer (and maybe also
the European organizations) and get his input on this. I'll let the
list know what concerns, if any, he has.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anthony Towns  writes:
> Personally, I think that's the minimum we ought to expect, but IME it's
> also a hell of a lot more work than it should be, and it'll require a
> chunk of effort from someone to actually make it happen.

This depends on two factors, namely how many transactions there are in
total in the various Debian-related accounts and how many of those are
Debian-specific. If we are talking about a couple of hundred
transactions, it is very doable as a volunteer work. If the number of
Debian-specific transactions is in the order of 1000 or more, then it
is a very different project (and should be split if it is a volunteer
project).

> Many of the machines are restricted; so anyone but DSA getting ssh access
> to all of them is unlikely; more likely is having the machines report the
> interesting statistics to LDAP and being able to query that. Knowing where
> machines are hosted, who they're owned by (the original sponsor? SPI?
> whoever's hosting them?), who the appropriate contact people are
> (replacement parts? hosting? local admin?) are important here.

This information is static and is a bit irrelevant from auditing point
of view. The purpose of auditing is to make sure that the assets are
there and that the governing body has used them wisely. It is entirely
possible that somebody replaces a server with a virtual server or
simply renames a machine to be identical with another machine.

I do agree that we could just start by checking the assets list and
maybe doing some trivial ping testing to see that the machines seem to
be on the net.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Constitutional Amendment GR: Handling assets for the project

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anthony Towns  writes:
> Again, if someone wants to volunteer to help get this right, please
> stick your hand up.

I haven't been following this thread too well lately, but what are
your thoughts on this? I'm willing to volunteer, as I do have some
experience in non-professional accounting and auditing (I'm not an
accounting or auditing professional but do have about 20 years of
experience in doing accounting and auditing for non-profit
organizations of various sizes).

My understanding is that there are three kinds of assets Debian has
(held in trust by SPI): monetary, hardware and IP. A trivial way of
auditing these is as follows (this is from a Finnish perspective, US
may do things differently).

Monetary assets: Bank statements for the auditing period provide
enough information in the normal case.

Hardware: For servers on the Internet, SSH access to those should
provide enough information as to their configuration.

IP: This requires a bit more work (I admit I have little experience in
this field). I'd say that a statement from the board as to what has
been done to protect the IP, including any applications made to the
proper authorities, would be a good start.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Vote analysis

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anthony Towns  writes:
> That's not really legitimate STV since when a vote ranks two candidates
> equally I count it towards both totals, which is why 231+237 = 468 which
> is more than the total number of votes (421), but it's the best we can
> do, I think.

Nah, here are the results from my WebVoter voting system
(http://webvoter.killeri.net):

Round: 1, Q=210.5, V=421.0, P=1
Candidate 1 has 54.20952 votes
Candidate 2 has 7.30952 votes
Candidate 3 has 105.04285 votes
Candidate 4 has 138.34285 votes
Candidate 5 has 59.70952 votes
Candidate 6 has 2.34285 votes
Candidate 7 has 40.04285 votes
Candidate 8 has 14.0 votes
Dropping candidate 6

Round: 2, Q=210.5, V=421.0, P=1
Candidate 1 has 55.28333 votes
Candidate 2 has 7.3 votes
Candidate 3 has 105.11666 votes
Candidate 4 has 138.3 votes
Candidate 5 has 59.78333 votes
Candidate 7 has 41.11666 votes
Candidate 8 has 14.0 votes
Dropping candidate 2

Round: 3, Q=210.5, V=421.0, P=1
Candidate 1 has 56.05000 votes
Candidate 3 has 106.88333 votes
Candidate 4 has 142.6 votes
Candidate 5 has 60.05000 votes
Candidate 7 has 41.38333 votes
Candidate 8 has 14.0 votes
Dropping candidate 8

Round: 4, Q=207.5, V=415.0, P=1
Candidate 1 has 58.25000 votes
Candidate 3 has 107.08333 votes
Candidate 4 has 144.8 votes
Candidate 5 has 63.25000 votes
Candidate 7 has 41.58333 votes
Dropping candidate 7

Round: 5, Q=206.5, V=413.0, P=1
Candidate 1 has 65.5 votes
Candidate 3 has 122.3 votes
Candidate 4 has 151.6 votes
Candidate 5 has 73.5 votes
Dropping candidate 1

Round: 6, Q=205.0, V=410.0, P=1
Candidate 3 has 148.5 votes
Candidate 4 has 169.0 votes
Candidate 5 has 92.5 votes
Dropping candidate 5

Round: 7, Q=201.5, V=403.0, P=1
Candidate 3 has 198.5 votes
Candidate 4 has 204.5 votes
Candidate 4 provisionally elected

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: question for all candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

[Moving this to -devel, please reply only there, this is not really
voting related stuff. We are talking about things to improve keyring
maintenance, for those not reading -vote.]

Anthony Towns  writes:
> So first one was the spam problem, keyring-maint is a well-known address,
> and mails that are meant to go to it could be in all sorts of weird
> formats. There's already magic debian.org handling that'll drop stuff
> without a pseudo-header in the mail (for [EMAIL PROTECTED]), or without
> a specific tag in the subject which should mostly solve the problem,
> which mostly requires working out some tags/headers and making sure all
> the appropriate documentation is updated.

Could these mails be required to have a valid GPG signature (either
for a key in a public keyserver or a DD key)? This would eliminate the
spam problem (almost) entirely.

> The third thing was to develop some new scripts to manage
> debian-keyring.gpg in a more componentised manner -- rather than
> one huge blob, have many small files that are independently auditable
> (this is the key for "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", it's authorised because it came
> via [EMAIL PROTECTED] after blah lost their key in a tragic accident
> involving a watermelon, it's signed by foo and bar...). The scripts
> to manage all this have to be simple, obviously correct and secure,
> and also fast enough to be usable.

I think I could at least try to tackle this, as this doesn't need
anything special. If somebody else is already working on this, I would
appreciate a heads-up :)

> Apparently there's been some mention of this on -private; I'm not
> sure when.

I recall some discussion, yes.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: question for all candidates

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anthony Towns  writes:
> In the mail to the DPL I mentioned above, James outlined three fairly
> significant technical changes that could be implemented to make the
> job easier, and could be done by anyone, without requiring any special
> priveleges;

What would these three things be? I might be interested in tackling
some of them.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: GFDL position statement ballot invalid

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Oliver Elphick  writes:
> Nevertheless, no foundation document is actually being changed.
> Therefore either this is a new foundation document, which requires a
> change to the constitution, or it does not require a supermajority.

The clause being changed by choice number 3 is clause number 10. It
would add a new license that the project definitely considers to be
free. There, happy? :)

> If choice 3 gets a majority but not by 3:1, whose view of the legalities
> will prevail?

The secretary's, as per 7.1.3. Feel free to propose a GR to override
his decision.

On a related topic, should the constitution define that overriding a
decision by the secretary conserning 7.1.3 requires a 3:1
supermajority? Currently it is entirely possible for a simple majority
of the developers to bypass the constitution.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: GFDL position statement ballot invalid

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Oliver Elphick  writes:
> If the Secretary's creative interpretation is allowed to stand, the
> proper description of what is happening can only be that this proposal
> adds a new foundation document.

As you (and some others) are only arguing about the 3:1 supermajority
requirement, why don't you wait and see what happens in the vote? If
the option 3 doesn't win by a simple majority, there is no problem. If
it does win by a simple majority but not by a supermajority, you can
continue arguing the constitutional details.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Debian doesn't have courts.  The closest we've got is debian-legal,

The closest thing to courts we have are DPL, TC, DAM, FTP masters and
the Project Secretary. They have a final decision making power that
effectively resolves any disputes among the developers. debian-legal
is just an advisory board for them.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Anton's amendment

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>From DFSG:
>
>The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in
>modified form _only_ if the license allows the distribution of
>"patch files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the
>program at build time.

What is the difference between a "patch file" as used in DFSG and a
"build system to produce a patch file" as used by you? I think a set
of files which run on the original source to produce the modified
source do qualify as a "patch file set", no matter how complex the
production run needs to be, as long as it is automated.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: {SPAM} Re: Anton's amendment

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As am I.  But we still have to accept it as a priori DFSG free unless we
> hold a 3:1 GR to change it, and we have to consider it in our thinking
> about other licenses.

As I wasn't around when the DFSG was drafted, it would be nice to hear
from those who were (yes, I'm too lazy to dig into the archive). There
are two possible explanations to having GPL and BSD listed as
examples:

1. GPL and BSD are DFSG-free licenses, thus you can use them to
   compare other licenses to.

2. GPL and BSD were grandfathered into being possible licenses to
   Debian, even though they are not DFSG-free. In this case you
   obviously cannot compare other licenses to them.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Anton's amendment

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>original_source+patch.  If you have two works covered by such
>license then there is no permissible way to distribute the source
>of the combined work (unless the combined work is merely
>aggregation of independent derivatives of both works).

Umm, why could I not distribute it as follows?

original_work_1.src.tar.gz
original_work_2.src.tar.gz
patch_set_to_these_two.tar.gz

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Democracy in Debian

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> procedure, remove you from your post is a hallmark of democracy.  In the
> case of the Project secretary, the procedure is indirect (by electing a
> project leader who will not reappoint you), but that's not a problem,

Actually, it is a direct procedure. The developers may, by way of a
GR, override any decision of the DPL, including an appointment.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: A clarification for my interpretation of GFDL

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> project has not decided this yet.  If the project secretary decides
> that my proposal (for GFDL) requires 3:1 supermajority, this would
> mean that the project secretary decides on behalf of the whole project
> that our notion of "free software" differs from the notion of FSF.

Actually, I think that both FSF and DFSG define "free software" pretty
similarily. The problem arises from the fact that our Social Contract
applies DFSG to all works, not just software, whereas FSF considers
software a special case. Do note that (eg.) the invariant sections are
_not_ present in the GPLv3 draft.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Anton's amendment

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> there's no law that specifically states you can't remove a credit or
> copyright notice, either - it's just convention AND the fact that you
> don't have any right to edit & redistribute except that which is granted
> by the license.

Sorry, you are wrong. The Finnish copyright law states that when a
full or partial copy is made publicly available the author must be
identified in a reasonable manner.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Anton's amendment

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> All they need to do, if you are right, is proceed to declare that
> their change is really just an interpretation of whatever is already
> there.  And, by hypothesis, they can present a claim that heck, a

Actually, a group of developers, no matter how large, can proceed to
claim whatever they want, but the project's interpretation is up to
the secretary. If (s)he is in the minority of one, it is still _his_
interpretation that matters, nobody elses.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Anton's amendment

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Yavor Doganov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As explained on http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-howto.html, the
> Invariant sections serve a special purpose, which is the case of the
> GNU Manifesto.  Many users, including myself, consider it a more
> important part than the GNU Emacs Manual itself.  How removing the
> document, that inspired thousands to join the efforts, will make
> Debian more free, I cannot tell...

So, if I were to write a program, which at startup displays the
entiretity of the GNU Manifesto, and wrote a license, which would be
GPL with the addition that the startup display may not be modified,
only amended, you would consider this program a DFSG program and it
could go into main?

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Anton's amendment

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I understand that this is how you interpret DFSG.  (BTW, the list in
> the brackets is not empty.)

Actually, I think that the DFSG already lists the license text as the
only unmodifiable part in the binary:

"The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must
allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of
the original software."

Note that a DFSG-free package may require that it may only be changed
if the changed package is distributed under the same license. Thus, in
this situation you can change everything else except the license.

> Just the opposite -- I wish we had more unambiguous DFSG.  The problem
> is that the current DFSG allow these different interpretations.

I'm beginning to wonder if it might be worth it to have a GR proposal
to the effect:

Change the third clause of DFSG as follows:
"The license must allow any modifications (excluding modifying the
license text) and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed
under the same terms as the license of the original software."

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: The invariant sections are not forbidden by DFSG

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As formulated at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html, the four
> software freedoms can not be applied directly to works that are not
> programs and in particular they can not be applied directly to
> documentation.  "Run the program" and "study how the program works"
> are certainly not activities that can be applied to documentation.

And this is what really differs from DFSG as currently written. Debian
consideres _everything_ to be under the same guidelines and there
should be no difference between a program, a manual or a
specification. FSF does not agree with us on this, so it is not always
possible to say "FSF Free == DFSG Free".

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Amendment: GFDL is compatible with DFSG

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't say the copy doesn't matter.  I say that there is no process
> of reading the copy.  Do I control your reading of the image on my

So you agree that using permission bits is obstructing the reading, as
defined in the GFDL?

>From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:
  obstruct
   v 1: hinder or prevent the progress or accomplishment of; "His
brother blocked him at every turn" [syn: {blockade}, {block},
 {hinder}, {stymie}, {stymy}, {embarrass}]

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: Amendment: GFDL is compatible with DFSG

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Anton Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The point is there is no practical difference whether the GNU
> Manifesto is placed in the preamble of the license or it is placed in
> an invariant section.

Actually, there is. I think that the consensus of debian-legal has
been that we must accept the fact that modifications to the license
terms are forbidden by the law. This does not mean that we should
accept unmodifiable sections elsewhere in the works.

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

[Kalle Kivimaa]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Proposal below seconded.

It seems that my Gnus settings do not work correctly for most people
(including devotee), if I try to send out GPG'd ISO-8859-1 emails.
This should be verifiable by all.

Seconding the proposal below.

>> =
>>
>> Why the GNU Free Documentation License is not suitable for Debian main
>> --
>>
>> Context
>> ---
>>
>> Within the Debian community there has been a significant amount of concern
>> about the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), and whether it is, in
>> fact, a "free" license. This document attempts to explain why Debian's
>> answer is that it is not free enough for the Debian distribution.
>>
>> It should be noted that this does not imply any hostility towards the
>> Free Software Foundation, and does not mean that GFDL documentation
>> should not be considered "free enough" by others. Debian itself will
>> continue distributing GFDL documentation in its "non-free" section,
>> which does not have such strict requirements.
>>
>> This document covers the GFDL version 1.2, which is the most current
>> version at the time of writing. Earlier versions of the GFDL have similar,
>> related problems.  
>>
>> What is the GFDL?
>> -
>>
>> The GFDL is a license written by the Free Software Foundation, who
>> use it as a license for their own documentation and promote it to
>> others. Notably, it is also used as Wikipedia's license. The GFDL is a
>> "copyleft" license in that modifications to documentation made under the
>> GFDL must in turn be released under the GFDL, not some more restrictive
>> license.  
>>
>> How does the GFDL fail to meet Debian's standards for Free Software?
>> 
>>
>> The GFDL conflicts with Debian's traditional requirements for free
>> software in a variety of ways, some of which are expanded upon below. As
>> a copyleft license, one of the consequences of this is that it is not
>> possible to include content from GFDL documentation directly into free
>> software.
>>
>> The major conflicts are:
>>
>>   Unmodifiable Sections
>>   -
>>
>> The most troublesome conflict concerns the class of unmodifiable sections
>> that, once included, may not be modified or removed from the documentation
>> in the future. These are Cover Texts, Dedications, Acknowledgements,
>> and Invariant Sections. Modifiability is a fundamental requirement of
>> the DFSG, which states:
>>
>> 3. Derived Works
>>
>> The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must
>> allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of
>> the original software.
>>
>> These components create particular problems in reusing small portions of
>> the work (since any invariant sections must be included also, however
>> large), and in making sure that documentation remains accurate and
>> relevant.  
>>
>>   Transparent Copies
>>   --
>>
>> The second conflict is related to the GFDL's requirements for "transparent
>> copies" of documentation (that is, a copy of the documentation in a form
>> suitable for editing). In particular, Section 3 of the GFDL requires
>> that a transparent copy of the documentation be included with every
>> opaque copy distributed, or that a transparent copy be made available
>> for a year after the opaque copies are no longer being distributed.
>>
>> For free software works, Debian expects that simply providing the source
>> (or transparent copy) alongside derivative works will be sufficient,
>> and that users need not be forced to obtain the source with every copy
>> of the binary they download, but this does not satisfy either clause of
>> the GFDL's requirements.  
>>
>>   Digital Rights Management
>>   -
>>
>> The third conflict with the GFDL arises from the measures in Section 2
>> that attempt to overcome Digital Rights Management (DRM) technologies. In
>> particular, the GFDL states that "You may not use technical measures
>> to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you
>> make or distribute". This inhibits f

Re: GR Proposal: GFDL statement

[Kalle Kivimaa]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Anthony Towns  writes:
> Okay, given the lack of further response (except for dato's alternate
> proposal!), I've tweaked the wording one more time, and I think this
> is the final version. Seconds appreciated.
>
> I propose the Debian project release the following statement on the GFDL:

Proposal below seconded.

> =
>
> Why the GNU Free Documentation License is not suitable for Debian main
> --
>
> Context
> ---
>
> Within the Debian community there has been a significant amount of concern
> about the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), and whether it is, in
> fact, a "free" license. This document attempts to explain why Debian's
> answer is that it is not free enough for the Debian distribution.
>
> It should be noted that this does not imply any hostility towards the
> Free Software Foundation, and does not mean that GFDL documentation
> should not be considered "free enough" by others. Debian itself will
> continue distributing GFDL documentation in its "non-free" section,
> which does not have such strict requirements.
>
> This document covers the GFDL version 1.2, which is the most current
> version at the time of writing. Earlier versions of the GFDL have similar,
> related problems.  
>
> What is the GFDL?
> -
>
> The GFDL is a license written by the Free Software Foundation, who
> use it as a license for their own documentation and promote it to
> others. Notably, it is also used as Wikipedia's license. The GFDL is a
> "copyleft" license in that modifications to documentation made under the
> GFDL must in turn be released under the GFDL, not some more restrictive
> license.  
>
> How does the GFDL fail to meet Debian's standards for Free Software?
> 
>
> The GFDL conflicts with Debian's traditional requirements for free
> software in a variety of ways, some of which are expanded upon below. As
> a copyleft license, one of the consequences of this is that it is not
> possible to include content from GFDL documentation directly into free
> software.
>
> The major conflicts are:
>
>   Unmodifiable Sections
>   -
>
> The most troublesome conflict concerns the class of unmodifiable sections
> that, once included, may not be modified or removed from the documentation
> in the future. These are Cover Texts, Dedications, Acknowledgements,
> and Invariant Sections. Modifiability is a fundamental requirement of
> the DFSG, which states:
>
> 3. Derived Works
>
> The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must
> allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of
> the original software.
>
> These components create particular problems in reusing small portions of
> the work (since any invariant sections must be included also, however
> large), and in making sure that documentation remains accurate and
> relevant.  
>
>   Transparent Copies
>   --
>
> The second conflict is related to the GFDL's requirements for "transparent
> copies" of documentation (that is, a copy of the documentation in a form
> suitable for editing). In particular, Section 3 of the GFDL requires
> that a transparent copy of the documentation be included with every
> opaque copy distributed, or that a transparent copy be made available
> for a year after the opaque copies are no longer being distributed.
>
> For free software works, Debian expects that simply providing the source
> (or transparent copy) alongside derivative works will be sufficient,
> and that users need not be forced to obtain the source with every copy
> of the binary they download, but this does not satisfy either clause of
> the GFDL's requirements.  
>
>   Digital Rights Management
>   -
>
> The third conflict with the GFDL arises from the measures in Section 2
> that attempt to overcome Digital Rights Management (DRM) technologies. In
> particular, the GFDL states that "You may not use technical measures
> to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you
> make or distribute". This inhibits freedom in three ways: it limits use
> of the documentation as well as distribution, by covering all copies
> made, as well as copies distributed; it rules out distributing copies
> on DRM-protected media, even if done in such a way as to give users
> full access to a transparent copy of the work; and, as written, it also
> potentially disallows encrypting the documentation, or even storing
> it on a system that provides user restrictions or file permissions for
> the documentation.
>
> Why does documentation need to be Free Software?
> 
>
> The question of "Why does software need free documentation?" has been
> addressed in the 

Re: Proposal for *Real* Declassification of debian-private archives

[Kalle Kivimaa]

Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Some of these issues are certainly unfixed, and very, very few might
> even be unpublished.  It's unlikely that one of those has been sent to
> Debian, though.

And if it has been sent to Debian and ignored, I'd say that our Social
Contract _mandates_ us to publish it ("We do not hide problems" - not
taking any action in _three_years_ is hiding).

> But anyway, we are dealing with *bugs*, and we have publicly
> documented that we won't hide them, so this aspect is probably okay in
> some twisted way.  I'm not sure if such a move will be well-received
> in the security community, though.

I don't think any security watchlist has a three-year time limit
between bug reporting and bug publishing. I may be wrong.

> I also worry about security reports that include personally
> identifiable information, trade (business?) secrets or copyrighted
> material, which are not really relevant to the bug itself, but were
> sent in with the expectation that this was a typical vendor security
> contact.  Publishing such things might get Debian into legal trouble,
> especially if the publication was not requested by the original
> author.

This is a valid concern. I would think that the declassification team
takes this into account. And as you can see from the proposal, we all
have a veto on the declassification (the list is published first to
the developers, who can then propose a GR - and I would think that
valid, strong objections directly to the team would work even without
a GR).

-- 
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P)  *
*   PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer   *


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