John Goerzen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The Debian stable distribution has been a thorn in our side for a long
> time. We tend to go a long time between releases, which means that
> stable grows less and less useful as time goes on. We also have a
> strict policy on what is allowed into stable.
>
> Th
Il giorno ven, 25/08/2006 alle 16.45 -0500, John Goerzen ha scritto:
> * Updates must undergo testing, ideally with peer review
This could be impossible if stable and testing distributions are
binary-incompatible (ie. using different versions of glibc), just like
sarge and etch are in this moment
On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 04:45:31PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> I think it's time we reopen the discussion on what stable means and what
> it should mean.
>
> To start with, [1] says that a package is only uploaded to stable when
> it meets one of these criteria:
>
> * it fixes a truly critical
Hello,
The Debian stable distribution has been a thorn in our side for a long
time. We tend to go a long time between releases, which means that
stable grows less and less useful as time goes on. We also have a
strict policy on what is allowed into stable.
This policy has many merits, especiall
Alexander Wirt schrieb am Freitag, den 25. August 2006:
> Don Armstrong schrieb am Donnerstag, den 24. August 2006:
>
> > I'd like to propose the following option to the current GR process.
> I second this proposal.
I have to say a few mores word to it. It would be fully ok for me if we
release
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 11:51:51PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I'd like to propose the following option to the current GR process.
I like your proposal too. As for D, maybe we could word it a bit differently,
as it will be a arduous task, with little success chances in the general case.
Maybe w
I second this proposal.
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 11:51:51PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I'd like to propose the following option to the current GR process.
>
> As I will (starting late sunday PDT) be away for a week and a few days
> at Burning Man,[i] I will be unable to appropriately respond to
[Matthew Garrett]
> The biggest area which is likely to bite us is with network cards,
> though we'll probably lose some degree of SCSI support as well.
Fortunately, at least with SCSI, users have a choice. They can buy
Adaptec or LSI 53c* and they get _truly free_ firmware (in the case of
Adap
Hello,
I second this proposal independently of the presence of the D clause,
although I prefer it being not removed.
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd like to propose the following option to the current GR process.
>
> As I will (starting late sunday PDT) be away for a week and a f
Don Armstrong schrieb am Donnerstag, den 24. August 2006:
> I'd like to propose the following option to the current GR process.
I second this proposal.
>
> As I will (starting late sunday PDT) be away for a week and a few days
> at Burning Man,[i] I will be unable to appropriately respond to
> c
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Don Armstrong wrote:
> D. Requests that vendors of hardware, even those whose firmware is
> not loaded by the operating system, provide the prefered form for
> modification so that purchasers of their hardware are can
This should read 'hardware can exercise'; I had
Le ven 25 août 2006 08:51, Don Armstrong a écrit :
I second that proposition
> =
>
> The Free Software movement is about enabling users to modify the
> works that they use on their computer; about giving users the same
> informat
12 matches
Mail list logo
