Re: Naming of non-uploading DDs
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes: I think unlimited upload access should be simply another one of those sets of permissions that some people have and others don't. Those who need that access to do their work can receive it after appropriate vetting of their ability to use that access appropriately, just as someone would volunteer to join ftp-master, or DSA, or keyring-maint, or the Lintian maintenance team and would, after appropriate vetting, be given additional privileges to do that work. In your vision of things, who would be responsible for granting these privileges and judging whether someone can be trusted to have them? I think our current model of giving all DDs access to the whole archive if they successfully complete NM works. We have procedures to deal with abuse, and we have tools to review the work of others (like the PTS, lintian.d.o, etc). Why move to a culture of having to ask permission? In my opinion, it's very valuable that any DD can decide out of the blue to go on a RC bug fixing spree if they happen to have the time, as some have done in the past. Thanks, -- Romain Francoise rfranco...@debian.org http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/ -- 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/8739tau40g@elegiac.orebokech.com
Re: Call for vote
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The draft ballot for this vote is appended. Please note that this is a draft ballot, voting has not yet started. Will this vote have secret ballots? -- ,''`. : :' :Romain Francoise [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/ `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Firmware Social Contract: GR proposal
I voted against the SC change back in 2004, and I haven't changed my mind. I second the proposal quoted below. The Debian Project resolves that: (a) The Social Contract shall be reverted to its original form, as at http://www.debian.org/social_contract.1.0 (b) The term software as used in the Social Contract shall be presumed only to cover programs, scripts, libraries and similar executable works to be executed directly as part of the Debian System. (c) In addition to the commitments made in the Social Contract, the Debian System shall only include documentation, images, sounds, video, fonts and similar works that meet the Debian Free Software Guidelines, and are available in some reasonably modifiable form. (d) Notwithstanding the above, the Debian Free Software Guidelines shall not be applied to logos, firmware or the text of copyright licenses that may be included in the Debian System. (e) Following the release of etch, the Debian Project Leader shall: i. ensure that the Debian community has a good understanding of the technical and legal issues that prevent the Debian Free Software Guidelines from being applied to logos and firmware in a manner that meets the needs of our users; ii. ensure that project resources are made available to people working on addressing those issues; iii. provide a report to the Debian community on progress achieved in these areas at DebConf 7 in Edinburgh. (f) Following the release of etch, the Debian Project as a whole shall reopen the question of which commitments should be codified in the project's Social Contract. This shall including both an online consultation with Debian users, Debian derivatives and the free software community, and a public in-person discussion and debate at DebConf 7 in Edinburgh in honour of the 10th anniversary of the original publication of the Social Contract on the 4th of July 1997. -- ,''`. : :' :Romain Francoise [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/ `- pgpxqFC8tBdxe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Amendment: GFDL is compatible with DFSG
programs non-free even though it can potentially make a GPL-covered program undistributable. Its purpose is against misuse of patents. Similarly, we do not think that GFDL covered documentation is non-free because of the measures taken in the license against misuse of DRM-protected media. [1] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-and-globalization.html [2] http://www.gnu.org/doc/gnupresspub.html -- ,''`. : :' :Romain Francoise [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/ `- pgppXvFLWfWKN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Question to all candidates.
Bill Allombert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How do you see the relation between Debian and Ubuntu in the future? Note that the LWN article about the DPL election has some quotes from the candidates about Ubuntu and Debian at: URL: http://lwn.net/Articles/127031/ Your question is probably (at least partially) answered there. -- ,''`. : :' :Romain Francoise [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/ `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question for candidate Robinson
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Which is why most DDs are unthrusthy of debian-legal to know how best to handle this. You've been asked already, but can you produce evidence of that? Maybe _you_ don't trust the debian-legal people, but please don't include the rest of the project in your offensive assertions. Thanks, -- ,''`. : :' :Romain Francoise [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/ `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
