On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 05:06:12PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I've been reminded [1] that we're still pending implementation of the
General Resolution entitled Declassification of debian-private list
archives [2].
snip
If you are interested please mail lea...@d.o with your declaration of
On 06/23/2010 07:22 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
The reason why I ask is because we have a hardware appliance that is based on
Debian and we are working on upgrading to version 5. Because the previous
version is not longer supported, we need to provide a patch policy for our
appliance.
If
On 25/06/2010 10:52, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
As usual in Debian - which is a community effort mostly - you can get a
release
quicker or longer security support for a release, if you pay somebody to do
so.
There are several companies and consultants who employ/are Debian developers
and
would
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 09:58:23AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Status update on this. We got some volunteers, but no one with actually
enough free time to start doing the declassification right now. In fact,
I have the gut feeling that this declassification issue is some kind of
RFP bug
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:36:24AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
I have the gut feeling that this declassification issue is some kind of
RFP bug which nobody really wants to pick. If you ask me if I would
prefer people working on fixing RC bugs or rather reading piles of old
mails to decide
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:57:06PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
But this
is not the point here: the point is rather that we had a vote on the
matter, we decided as a project that such archives shall be
declassified. Now it's time to keep up with what we promised.
I clearly remember that
* Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org [100625 12:57]:
Apparently ATM we don't have the energy to do that. That is just fine:
we are all volunteers and we cannot be forced to do specific stuff.
Still, we need to show our honesty, clarify our willingness to implement
our decision, and make clear
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 01:19:42PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
I clearly remember that vote. But how much sense does this vote make if
nobody does the actual work? Voting about a decision is cheap, but
doing the work is not. Normally you vote between comparable options.
We voted between no
On Friday 25 June 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I'm not sure I understand against *what* exactly you're arguing; nor it
is clear to me whether you are proposing a different course of action
than the status quo.
The vote is there and we cannot change the past [...]
I would welcome a new GR
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 01:59:53PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
The vote is there and we cannot change the past;
I do not want to change the past.
the vote gives a
process (as Bernhard observed in a different post) and shows our
willingness to be transparent. Are you proposing to state
Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl writes:
I would welcome a new GR to rescind the previous one and revert
d-private to what it's always been: private. That way we can stop
worrying about the whole issue and we will no longer run the risk of
making things public that their authors do not want to be
Hi
Here is an overview of the most important financial flows of money hold
on Debian's behalf this year up to May 31st.
January:
SPI [0] (in USD):
* donations:+ 9,849.73
* freight: - 3,372.66
* hard drives: - 1,138.35
* processing fees: -
On 25/06/2010 07:43 μμ, Russ Allbery wrote:
I would welcome a new GR to rescind the previous one and revert
d-private to what it's always been: private. That way we can stop
worrying about the whole issue and we will no longer run the risk of
making things public that their authors do not want
[Andreas Tille]
I do not want to stop any volunteer to do the work. I just doubt
there will be anybody.
In other words,
1. You think declassification is not worth anyone's time
2. You are not volunteering to do it
3. You don't want to stop other people from volunteering to do
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
I would welcome a new GR to rescind the previous one and revert
d-private to what it's always been: private. That way we can stop
worrying about the whole issue and we will no longer run the risk of
making things public that their authors do not want to be
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 03:20:14PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote [edited]:
My own opinion is that we've done this backwards, and that everything
on -private modulo vacation messages and posts explicitely marked with
a header indicating that they shouldn't be declassified should be
declassified
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
On Saturday 26 June 2010, Don Armstrong wrote:
My own opinion is that we've done this backwards, and that everything
on -private modulo vacation messages and posts explicitely marked with
a header indicating that they shouldn't be declassified should be
17 matches
Mail list logo
