Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
I have just received a review by a l10n team of a package of mine.
The reviewer seems to be under the impression that there is something
wrong with the computer speaking to the user in the first person.
I'm not active within the l10n-english
Patrick Matthäi pmatth...@debian.org wrote:
GeoIP is a quite usefull library for geolocation.
It has got a stable ABI/API and upstream is normaly very helpfull with
patches and issues.
[...]
Currently I see only three options:
1) upstream decides to open his build system
2) we move it to
problem.
Beware some of the ported CCs which include the trademark notice by
mistake and produced a licence which failed to follow DFSG - and some were
incompatible with other CC licences.
Hope that helps,
--
MJ Ray
My Opinion Only, see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
through debconf option?);
3. something else.
Thanks,
--
MJ Ray (slef)
Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small
worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
(Notice http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html) tel:+44-844-4437-237
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
Peter Palfrader [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
It's just the usual nit-picking on anybody who actually does anything to
improve our infrastructure. [...]
It's also combined with the usual failure by many people who improve
our infrastructure to accept they wrote a confusing email (ftp-master
Peter Palfrader [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, MJ Ray wrote:
Posting a simple mail like I can't predict why we might want to move
it, but it seems like a possibility we should leave open and yes,
ftp-master was a symbolic name, but isn't the best one now. Please use
the new
gluck, merkel,
samosa and raff uncontactable (192.25.206.* network problem?)
I don't know anything more at this time, but wanted to push a small
message out so that others know it isn't just them and lists and IRC
are both still up, as far as I can see so far.
We now return you to your
/msg00350.html to
ML Discussion if you're set up for editing it.
(BTW, your message-ids are @localhost - MTA config OK? ;- )
Regards,
--
MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative
as that Postfix won't last.
Best wishes,
--
MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ -
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http
mail?
I suspect that sleeping in the perl would delay all incoming mail and
there's no access(5) response like Exim's delay, else I could do it
another way. How can it be done? (I want to increase the connection
cost to maybe-spammers of sending to my postfix...)
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ti, 2007-10-23 kello 09:44 -0500, Steve Greenland kirjoitti:
But the license on the package itself doesn't make that restriction.
If I have understood things correctly, in England (and the rest of the
UK?) the copyright is owned by the crown and
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
and a vaguely interesting note is:
* actually suing based on the license might be complicated by a
choice of venue
That you can argue the latter is analogous to a fee isn't really
very interesting. That some people are concerned
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
That's mostly because -legal won't even say that the GPLv2 is DFSG-free,
except in so far as it's explicitly listed as being DFSG-free.
Got a reference for that?
GPLv2 is a very frequently-suggested DFSG-free licences, has been the
subject of
,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An arm buildd maintainer not reading [EMAIL PROTECTED] is simply not
doing his job as buildd maintainer.
Please show where reading everything on [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
given as a requirement for buildd maintainership.
You can't pretend to be the one
Stephane Bortzmeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Please show where reading everything on [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
given as a requirement for buildd maintainership.
It seems common sense!
Huh? It seems common sense that most subscribers ignore at least some
list
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 08:26:56PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Should the ftpmasters, who have even less legal expertise,
Judging by some of the nonsense that debian-legal is typically riddled with,
It's generally quite easy to spot the
Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The d-l list has a problem which is shared by many Debian mailing
lists (including debian-vote and debian-devel, and I'm sure it's not
limited to them) which is that far too many people subscribe to the
last post wins school of debate. People don't listen, they
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I suspect that if it were confined to Debian developers, this problem
would be much reduced. Not eliminated, but reduced.
On what is that suspicion based?
I disagree. Some of the worst noiseboxes were DDs and some of the
best moderators weren't.
David Pashley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Out of interest, if[0] that is saying that we agree that anything isn't
Sun's fault isn't Sun's fault (which is fair enough) then that doesn't
mention anything about any warranty that we might offer. For the large
majority of the software we ship, we disclaim
Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...] as we've just seen, people (both people from debian-legal and
elsewhere) do seem to think that debian-legal is or ought to be where
these decisions are taken.
Who did that? I must have missed a few posts.
FWIW, I think that debian-legal is a useful
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 05:42:27PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Exactly! It's not our fault, so why should we indemnify Sun against it?
If it's not our fault, it's not under our control, and we *don't* need
to indemnify. That's what the FAQ says; and whether
Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In linux.debian.legal MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The package maintainer did not ask debian-legal (serious bug) and I'm
They do not need to.
No, there's no absolute *need* to do that, or to follow any of the other
directions in debian policy, but it's usually
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 11:34:10PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
The package maintainer did not ask debian-legal (serious bug)=20
That's mistaken. debian-legal is a useful source of advice, not a
decision making body. That's precisely as it should be, since
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The guideline to ask debian-legal is not enforced by policy, but
suggested by the Developer's Reference.
Please don't confuse things by introducing the DevRef to this.
An instruction to mail debian-legal about doubtful copyrights is in policy
s2.3. It is a
Daniel Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
debian-legal, OTOH, claims that not only is the stock MIT/X11 licence
'non-free', but 'it is impractical to work with such software'.
I don't believe that those claims are consensual on debian-legal. The
MIT/X11 licence is frequently recommended by participants,
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, it doesn't say that: it says If in doubt, send mail to -legal. It
doesn't say if the license is doubtful, which is a different matter
entirely.
We've been told both James and Jeroen extensive contact with
Sun to ensure that the tricky clauses were actually
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 09:41:27AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Cool. Where is this effect of sections 2(f)(i) and 14 disputed? I've
seen repeated claims that we're not liable for Sun's changes and downstream
changes, but not upstream changes of parts
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 02:38:55PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Why do I need a case where some other application breaks?
The indemnification is for problems in the Operating System,
not only for Sun Java.
Right. And what's wrong with that? Why do you think it's
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Starting with What is key for Debian makes it sound like a policy
statement on behalf of Debian, and Just fix the license could then be
interpreted as a demand from Debian that Sun alter the license.
If Sun believe things from random people that easily, then
Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It has happened in the past that the DPL asked a DD and a NM to make
together a team to deal with a problematic license and to give together
official Debian statements. [...]
Whatever happened to that? July's coming, bringing a new FDL draft,
if the news
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au [...]
And people are welcome to hold that opinion and speak about it all they
like, but the way Debian makes the actual call on whether a license
is suitable for distribution in non-free isn't based on who shouts the
loudest on a mailing list, it's on the
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...] I refer
to Policy on a regular basis, but I don't think I've read the devref since I
went through the NM queue. [...]
Then, as you know, Policy contains the instruction:
'When in doubt about a copyright, send mail to debian-legal@lists.debian.org'
and
Adam Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
license agreement; and (f) you agree to defend and indemnify Sun
and its licensors from and against any damages, costs, liabilities,
settlement amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees)
incurred in connection with any claim, lawsuit or
Does anyone know the current status of maintainer Christoph Wegscheider?
Last maintainer uploads:
* qiv 2005-05-23 (sponsor Thomas Viehmann cc'd)
* potracegui 2005-05-01 (sponsor Bartosz Fenski cc'd)
* rsnapshot 2005-04-14 (I sponsored this)
Staging repository http://wegi.net/debian/ last
Stephen Gran [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This one time, at band camp, Michael Banck said: [...]
Or rethink whether your issue needs posting at all.
This is Jidanni you're talking to.
Please follow Michael Banck's advice before posting more
opaque comments that look like pure personal attacks.
--
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: MJ Ray (Debian) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: irc2html.scm
Version : 1.2
Upstream Author : MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://mjr.towers.org.uk/software.html#other
* License : GPL
Description : Convert IRC
Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
donated by Schlund + Parner where it is hosted as well. It is a
DualCore Opteron and only runs this service for Debian users and
developers.
I think/hope it should read runs only this service.
Hope that helps,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see
Floris Bruynooghe [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...]
But I've heard people claiming M-F-T is not a proper standard (despite
not having an X- in the header) and even being broken. [...]
If I recall correctly, you can look in the IETF DRUMS working
group archive and you'll see it not becoming a proper
Anand Kumria [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So, if you feel a particular post was inappropriate / out-of-line bring
it to the attention of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I suggest using a bug report if it's important enough
to track. This is mentioned as an alternative on
http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#maintenance
Xavier Roche [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, J=E9r=F4me Marant wrote:
I'd propose to revert this and clearly define what software is.
I fully agree. The Holier than Stallman stuff is really getting
ridiculous. After the firmware madeness, now the documentation madeness.
[...]
/#codeofconduct
so please honour it.
Thanks,
--
MJ Ray - personal email, see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Work: http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ irc.oftc.net/slef Jabber/SIP ask
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
seem to like vim, IME.
--
MJ Ray - personal email, see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Work: http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ irc.oftc.net/slef Jabber/SIP ask
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
), and will do so when
invoked as vi
- vim-tiny is on fewer platforms than nvi, which seems as
important as size or accuracy of emulation.
--
MJ Ray - personal email, see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Work: http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ irc.oftc.net/slef Jabber/SIP ask
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:11:14PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
- vim-tiny is on fewer platforms than nvi, which seems as
important as size or accuracy of emulation.
Vim still runs in 16-bit DOS, and I think it even has a functioning OS/2
build, but it won't run
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 21-Dec-05, 16:11 (CST), MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Current unstable Installed-Size:
vim-tiny ranges from 696 to 1852 with a median of 898k.
nvi ranges from 560 to 1040 with a median of 648k
Ranges? Over what? Architectures?
Yes, architectures
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
[...] Even if in the last two years it has become
popular among some debian-legal@ contributors while the rest of the
project was not looking [...]
Yes, the debian-legal cabal has been working in secret on its
public mailing list and has devised a plot
On 2003-10-06 19:57:06 +0100 Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A logo is a graphical equivalent of a name.
I do not believe that, either. The logo is more of a creative work
than a word.
As to your example, you should note that the BSD licence does not
attempt to enforce the trademark
48 matches
Mail list logo
