Hi.
(not subscribed to debian-vote, so please CC me, eventually).
Sorry if I'm unaware of details of our constitutional corpus and
procedures, but is there a way to track evolutions in a GR page like
[0], if not subscribed to -vote ?
Since the GR was announced on d-d-a, I think it would be great
On 03/11/2014 07:18 AM, Olivier Berger wrote:
> I guess the whole site is in CVS, and one could find some history, but
> maybe there could be some easier way...
Yes. I guess it's a bit ugly to look at the wml sources, but it is all here:
See https://www.debian.org/devel/website/using_cvs and spec
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:59:42AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > This is to propose a general resolution under §4.1.5 of the constitution
> > to propose a Debian code of conduct.
>
> So I've put up a vote page with my current understanding at:
> https://www.debian.org/vote/20
My apologies if my clumsy reply to the web version of the list damaged
attributions or broke the thread.
> Op woensdag 26 februari 2014 15:25:25 schreef u:
>> On Wed, 26 Feb 2014, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>>
> >
>
>> - Wrap your lines at 80 characters or less for ordinary discussion.
>> Lines longer
Hi,
Following the discussion in
https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2014/03/msg00012.html, I asked
FFIS to describe how they met the features listed at
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DPL/TrustedOrganizationCriteria.
I'm forwarding their answers below; please use the next two weeks to
ask follo
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:18:10AM +0100, Olivier Berger wrote:
> Hi.
>
> (not subscribed to debian-vote, so please CC me, eventually).
>
> Sorry if I'm unaware of details of our constitutional corpus and
> procedures, but is there a way to track evolutions in a GR page like
> [0], if not subscri
There is some ongoing discussion (on debian-legal) about whether the FTP
masters will accept a particular package
The FTP team wiki[1] links to a delegation email[2]
The delegation email is very light, it just says they are "Accepting and
rejecting packages that enter the NEW and byhand queues"
http://bugs.debian.org/535645 is perhaps relevant:
2. reaffirms the ftp team's authority to exercise their own judgement in
deciding to remove packages from the archive, whenever this is done for
reasons consistent with the twin mandates to keep the archive operational
and to support the
On 11/03/14 19:22, Paul R. Tagliamonte wrote:
> http://bugs.debian.org/535645 is perhaps relevant:
>
>
> 2. reaffirms the ftp team's authority to exercise their own judgement in
> deciding to remove packages from the archive, whenever this is done for
> reasons consistent with the twin ma
Daniel Pocock writes ("clarify FTP master delegation?"):
> The FTP team wiki[1] links to a delegation email[2]
>
> The delegation email is very light, it just says they are "Accepting and
> rejecting packages that enter the NEW and byhand queues" without any
> reference to the policies they should
On 11/03/14 20:19, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Daniel Pocock writes ("clarify FTP master delegation?"):
>> The FTP team wiki[1] links to a delegation email[2]
>>
>> The delegation email is very light, it just says they are "Accepting and
>> rejecting packages that enter the NEW and byhand queues" withou
On 11 Mar 2014, at 18:20, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> There is some ongoing discussion (on debian-legal) about whether the FTP
> masters will accept a particular package
For those who weren’t around 10 years ago, I would suggest[0] reading up on
#283578, and associated mails to the lists, LWN articl
12 matches
Mail list logo
