On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 11:27:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> With this message we define a way to appeal a DAM action,
I'm treating this as if it's a first draft and open to comment.
> 1. Appealing DAM decisions
> --
> Any person who had their Debian membership suspend
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 10:47:05AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> People seem to feel they're unreasonably put-upon by having to think about
> what they're saying *at all*, but this is absurd. Everyone else in the
> world is doing this all the time.
There are times when you don't have to think abou
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 02:41:18PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:07:08AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > My own view on the original question ("What are you expected the DPL to
> > do?") is that the main thing the DPL must absolutely do is being a good
> > "garbage
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 02:15:22PM +, Sam Hartman wrote:
> One huge advantage of teaching our package management tools to
> understand alternate package technologies and convert on the fly is that
> we can use the mirror networks of the language-specific packages.
> Unfortunately, we're fairly
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:03:08AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jan 2015, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > CRAN has about 6k (~250 in Debian),
> Just to piggyback here, debian-r.debian.net has about 8.6k of these
> packages (bioc, cran, and omegahat).
Talk about giving 110%! [
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:29:19AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Anthony Towns dijo [Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:57:55AM +]:
> > (Yes, I really think Debian should have 300k+ packages, including
> > everything in all the language archives, no matter how special purposes
> >
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:51:32AM +, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:57:55AM +0000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > It takes a couple of minutes to download something using pip or
> > npm; how long does it take to get a python or nodejs Debianized and
>
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 07:02:51PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > - there are "archive networks" for most programming languages these days:
> >CPAN, CRAN, Hackage, PyPI, RubyGems, NPM, CCAN, etc. Installing
&
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 06:46:16PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Gunnar Wolf writes:
> > ... And yes, maybe Debian is less attractive in general ...
> One side effect of this is that packaging feels like a solved problem.
If so (and assuming that's all Debian's about), then that'd be a good
reason
On 29 June 2014 19:14, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On 26 June 2014 08:18, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Anthony Towns writes ("Re: Maximum term for tech ctte members"):
>>- Term limit: Every 1st of November, the most senior member of the
>> Technical Committee
On 26 June 2014 08:18, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes ("Re: Maximum term for tech ctte members"):
>- Term limit: Every 1st of November, the most senior member of the
> Technical Committee's is immediately and automatically removed
> from the Com
On 30 May 2014 19:37, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I might have another go at seeing if I can word it for rolling twelve
> months, to see if that's workable.
Okay, so I gave it a go, and came up with:
- A Technical Committee member's term will end upon resignation, removal
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 07:58:45PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm still skeptical that something built around people typically serving
> for eight years is the sort of turnover we want, but it's the conservative
> approach and doesn't change too much at once. Which has some definite
> merits.
I
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 09:02:25AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Russ Allbery:
> > I had picked four-year terms because I think adding one member every six
> > months (or two members every year) is probably near the upper limit of
> > membership management that the TC can deal with and still get
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 10:37:05AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >>> If we want the opportunity to appoint new members regularly, rather
> >>> than expire old members per se, we could just say that: "on July 1st,
> >>> the two longest serving ctte members' term expires" to end up with (on
> >>> aver
tte/2002/10/msg7.html
Anthony Towns ~ 3y
2006-01-05 - 2009-01-06
(1.186 - 1.312)
https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2009/01/msg6.html
Klee Dienes ~ 2.5y
1998-12-14 - 2001-06-01
(* - 1.42)
https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2001/05/msg00010.html
I've put the CVS r
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 11:02:17AM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> The Australian senate (our federal parliament) has 8 year terms. In
(6 year terms; same as the US senate as it happens. We have 3 years
terms the house of reps and hence prime minister as compared to 2 year
terms for the US hous of
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 11:37:53AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Yeah; I don't think that's a bad rule in general, but I'm not convinced
> > it's a great fit for the tech-ctte. The thought experiment that makes me
> > doubt it is "if a compulsory x year break after n years of service makes
> > sen
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 01:07:11AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> - continuity is valuable in a body like the tech-ctte, where there
> aren't that many decisions on a yearly basis (and hence, for instance,
> it takes time to get new members up to speed).
You could get continuity by having
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 01:07:11AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 06:58:36PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> I believe a maximum of 5 years in a
> row with a minimum 1-year suspension before being able to join again
> would work well for our tech-ctte.
I think 5 years w
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 06:40:22PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > Would anyone else be supportive of a proposal to set a term for tech
> > ctte membership?
> I just mentioned this today in our TC meeting, so obviously I've been
> thinking along th
Hello world,
Would anyone else be supportive of a proposal to set a term for tech ctte
membership?
The current tech ctte members were appointed:
Ian: May/Dec 1998 (15 years, 5 months) [0]
Bdale: Apr 2001 (13 years, 1 month) [1]
Andreas: Jan 2006 (8 years, 4 months) [2]
Steve: Jan 2006 (8 yea
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 07:42:24PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Comparison between etch/main and feisty/main+universe by source:
> As at today (2009/08/11) etch/feisty security support compare as follows:
> 63 packages with security updates in both Debian and Ubuntu (11
Hmm, let&#
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 03:55:16PM +, Anthony Towns wrote:
> etch: 2006/12 - 2007/04 (decent hit for feisty's import freeze)
> lenny: 2008/07 - 2009/02 (decent hit for jaunty's import freeze)
>
> dapper and hardy are the two Ubuntu LTS releases so far
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 08:44:29PM +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> Margarita Manterola wrote:
> > If Debian commits to a December freeze, would that mean that Ubuntu
> > commits to releasing 10.04 with KDE 4.3 (already released) and [...]
> The proposal as I understood it was that in December, th
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 11:55:04AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Amen. I think two years is a little too long and 18 months would be much
> > better.
> We never actually have managed the 18 month release, have we? We
> freeze approximatly 18
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 05:44:58PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:51:35AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Also in many cases, Ubuntu and Debian teams can't fully collaborate
> > because they do not target the same upstream version, freezing at the same
> > time should make
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 05:17:57PM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 01:07:39PM +0000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > [...] The tradeoffs to me seem to be:
> >
> > Debian stable Ubuntu LTS
> >
> > 2 year rel cycle
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:49:48AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Doesn't this imply that everyone who continues using Debian today does so
> merely as an accident of the release schedule and the particular set of
> packages that land in a given Debian release?
That and the fact that upgrades betw
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 01:09:35PM +, Anthony Towns wrote:
> For three, what happened to getting the firmware issue resolved early in
> squeeze's cycle [1]? It's evidently no longer early in squeeze's cycle,
> so maybe I just somehow missed the decisio
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:25:01AM +0200, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> Steffen Moeller schrieb:
> > Same here. The release team, or the individual that pressed the button for
> > the
> > announcement, I suggest to apologize for disturbing our community.
> The text was coordinated within the
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 04:12:58AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 July 2009, Meike Reichle wrote:
> > The Debian project has decided to adopt a new policy of time-based
> > development freezes for future releases, on a two-year cycle.
> Disappointing to see such an announcement without a
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> * "Vocal minority" dominates "silent majority" by contributing a
> disproportionate amount of list traffic, [...]
Note that voting can have a similar drawback -- in that if you've got
enough like-minded people voting for a particular
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:18:01PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think these have the same flaw as our current situation: none of them
> state who interprets the Social Contract and the DSFG if there is a
> dispute over what they mean.
If there is a dispute in Debian, there are three levels at
> On Fri Dec 19 21:10, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > ,[ The social contract is binding but may be overridden by a simple
> > > GR ]
> > > | This amends the proposal above, and replaces the text of the proposal
> > > | with: The developers, via a general resolution, determine that the
> > > | s
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 09:10:25PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > ,[ The social contract is a goal, not a binding contract ]
> > | This amends the proposal above, and replaces the text of the proposal
> > | with: The developers, via a general resolution, determine that the
> > | social cont
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 07:53:15AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> The following changes to the Debian keyring have been made:
> May I guess that this good news is somehow connected to [1]?
> If yes, thanks once more to our former DPL!
Not really an automated mail, but we can pretend.
The following changes to the Debian keyring have been made:
ag
Full name: Aurelien Gerome
Linked key: 2FC3907C20D963EBB234D023236C60C665B4B162
(formerly belonging to dm:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
akumar
Full name: Kumar Appaiah
Adde
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 01:16:29PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> If we called this field a summary, one interface to use it could be to
> mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] to set a new summary. This would add
> the message to the detailed bug log, [...]
That more or less means having a particular message in the
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 12:15:33PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > > For example, the machine-parsable copyright thing
> > > seems (to me) to be pretty much accepted as a Good Thing, but it's
> > > unclear when it would be a good idea to start suggesting or even
> > > mandating it in policy.
> > Well,
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:12:53AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> If people want to do this, it's useful. The problem that is described
> is that people don't actually want to do this, because they don't know
> if their solution will be used.
That seems a pretty bad rationale -- implementing your s
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:18:30PM +0100, Adeodato Sim?? wrote:
> Currently, when having discussions about improvements to Debian, it is
> not always clear when consensus has been reached, and people willing to
> implement it may start too early, [...]
Isn't it useful to have sample implementation
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 09:55:19AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > > Why can't we manage the DEP list just like the rest in a VCS ? A VCS
> > > commit is atomic. :)
> > To avoid religious was on which VCS to choose :-)
> Just use svn for that part.
On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 08:59:56PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> It was closer, but there were stray x89 and x94 strings (as literal
> strings, not as escapes or hex encodings of characters).
Ah, well, that makes some sense. That's what gpg's dumping to me:
$ gpg --with-colons --list-key 65B4B162
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 12:32:02AM +, Joey Hess wrote:
> dm:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Full name: Aur??lien G?\x89R?\x94ME
So did that display any better for people with properly setup fonts?
Cheers,
aj
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 02:57:22AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > dm:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Full name: Aur?lien G?R?ME
> (rewritten w/o half-broken encoding, maybe it would be nice to send
> mails using something different from us-ascii?)
Patches welcome. A suggested Content-Type: header mig
On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:44:50PM +0530, Ramakrishnan Muthukrishnan wrote:
> As people have already explained, this is not the first mistake people
> have commited. And at the same time, I agree that it was a grave
> mistake on my part and I publicly apologize for this mistake. If you
> care to r
: 57AD42ECB22F67D713AF1AB2290FBE52EEA07609
A summary of all the changes in this upload follows.
Debian distribution maintenance software,
on behalf of,
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 03:14:00 +1000
Source:
On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 09:34:21PM +0530, Kartik Mistry wrote:
> > Kartik what possible reason did you have for overriding the lintian
> > error report, rather than changing your package to remove the error?
> linhdd introduce binary abs_fdisk which was modified copy of fdisk
> from new version 0.4
On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 11:22:52PM +0530, Ramakrishnan Muthukrishnan wrote:
> [I did not recieve the original email addressed to me by aj, so I am
> literally "reading between the lines" to digest the original message]
It was sent to your @d.o address, and is in the list archives at:
http://l
Hi Ramakrishnan, Mohammed, Jaldhar, Kartik,
It's been pointed out that Kartik's latest upload of linhdd has included
an i386 binary in arch:all package, and explicitly overriden the lintian
warning for it (see the mail quoted below). That seems pretty dodgy.
Kartik what possible reason did you h
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 03:13:52PM +, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Anthony Towns said:
> > When psql on merkel gets updated to a version that can load the dumps
> > from ftp-master [...]
> Can we just open the postgres port on ftp-master to merkel, and
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 06:10:42PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 12:10:41PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > Here is the current list.
> When psql on merkel gets updated to a version that can load the dumps
> from ftp-master, you can get a more accurate
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 12:10:41PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Here is the current list.
When psql on merkel gets updated to a version that can load the dumps
from ftp-master, you can get a more accurate view of who can upload what
by ssh'ing to merkel and running:
psql projectb <')
WHERE
On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 02:51:42PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Hm, it didn't seem like a mentor role to me. Being a mentor involves
> telling the mentee how to solve a problem and helping them work through
> the learning process.
I would've said it involves helping them work through the proces
Apparently bouncing messages to -project doesn't work so well, so this
is a forward of [0] instead. Future messages will be sent direct to
-project when an update d-m package is accepted.
[0] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/d-m-team/2007-November/13.html
-- aj
With the upload of d
If this were a real mail, there would be some useful content here.
Cheers,
aj
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 09:55:57AM +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
> I'm sure that the intentions are good, but Joerg has a point about these
> three DM's. Maybe it is better to replace these three DM registrations
> in the DM keyring by three artificial DM's owned by DD's.
For the record, the code
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 12:45:54AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 10:44:29PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > Please follow your own rules. Thanks.
> Besides, and with a sharp different tone, if Debian Maintainers are a
> reality now ...
It's not yet; remaining holdups
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 10:00:47AM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 02:43:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > It should be relatively straight forward for Devotee to find the
> > winner, take the winner out of contention the next round, find the next
> >
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:51:32PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> I don't personaly think being publicly
> discredited by our mistakes is something we want as a community.
Being publicly discreditted for our mistakes seems like exactly the
right thing to happen to me, actually. Helps discourage us
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 03:57:39PM +0200, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> I would to see some kind of statement, too.
How about "To the best of our knowledge, Debian is free of patent
encumberance. We will, however, happily accept patent indeminfications
for our users, upstream developers, and derived
On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 12:48:26AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> http://people.debian.org/~mjr/legal/trademarks.html
] Just to be clear, the two debian logos are currently under the restrictive
] copyright licences described on http://www.debian.org/logos/ (set by
] votes in 1999) and not currently suita
On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 09:41:09AM +0200, Fr??d??ric PICA wrote:
> This the follow up of the same thread in debian-release :
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2007/06/msg00039.html
In that thread, Martin Krafft wrote:
] To support a release for 4-5 years, we would need substantially more
]
On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 10:56:32PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:30:24PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > Also, I can already see opposition to a committee which is only elected
> > once, and can then change its own membership at will, while retaining
> > all of its the powers
On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 03:15:06PM +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> -> do we really need to make this more complicated than:
> 1) "sponsor officially declares this person can in his opion handle the
> sponsored package"?
> 2) sponsoree gets upload rights for that package
We need some wa
On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 11:30:28PM -0400, Philippe Cloutier wrote:
> >Hey, why not? A third idea: instead of having delegates or a committee
> >or whatever to decide amongst disputes, how about randomly selecting a
> >jury from DDs and having their word (on who's right, on what punishment
> >is pla
Hey all,
As a slight distraction from other discussions going on, I'd like to
throw a couple of ideas out there for consideration, particularly with
debconf coming up and a chance for many of us to discuss things in person.
First, the "Debian Maintainers" concept, ie giving limited upload access
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:56:02AM -0300, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw)
wrote:
> Hopefully, I think we can start having DWN weekly
> again, so let's try. :-)
The DWN contribution howto is at:
http://www.debian.org/News/weekly/contributing
The most relevant points are probably:
Right
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:34:47AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> I propose another idea: having a major.minor release scheme in
> which we guarantee the upgrade path from major.x to major+1.0, and
> from one minor release to the other. One big obstacle common to all
> these directions is to
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 09:12:40AM -0300, Gustavo R. Montesino wrote:
> 1. Query BTS according to paramaters given by the user. It could filter
> the bugs by maintaner, uploader, package, usertags, tags, etc. Display a
> list with bug number, title and tags to the user.
> 2. The user may select on
Hey all,
At their meeting today, SPI passed [0] a motion formalising Debian's
relationship with SPI. AIUI, the text of the motion is as per:
http://lists.spi-inc.org/pipermail/spi-general/2007-March/002245.html
Cheers,
aj
[0] The votes were four in favour (Ian Jackson, Michael Schultheiss,
like it meets the
requirement of "sponsored 30 uploads in the last six months" that I
suggested for being able to recommend a DM originally [1].
It seems sensible to me to have the recommendation take the form of a
file that we can just dump directly into jetring. I was thinking somethi
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 08:50:06PM +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote:
> My first thought: do we really need this new class of contributors? I
> mean how many people do you currently know fitting in this category
> (don't like to become DD just maintainers).
It's not "don't want to be a DD", it's "aren
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 12:37:38AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> If the "Debian maintainer" uploads a package changing the
> Maintainer/Uploaders field to his own name, what happens ?
Nothing in particular. The Maintainer/Uploaders field of the existing
source package in the target suite are wha
Hey all,
Over the past few weeks, after Joey Hess created the jetring keyring
management tool from whole cloth [0], I've been poking at changing dak
to support a "maintainers" keyring [1] so that we can make it possible for
people who want to work on just one or two packages able to do exactly
tha
emoval.
diffring.pl should deal with those fwiw. Doesn't deal with revocations, and
may not deal well with subkeys.
Cheers,
aj
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
# Copyright (c) 2007 Anthony Towns
# GNU GPL; v2 or later
# Gives an overview of what changed between two keyrings
use strict;
my $l = parse_keyr
On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 12:54:41AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> > That means you can't reorder changesets easily. I wonder if it'd be
> > better say "del uid [EMAIL PROTECTED]" and have the tool work out
> > which uid (if any) that is.
> I don't feel that reordering changesets is a good thing in gener
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 11:15:00PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Changed-By: Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Comment: Removing an old email address.
I'm not sure that's plausible -- afaik the keyring gets synced to the
real keyservers for new signatures and uids, so removing addresses
doesn't work; th
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 03:54:54PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
> > If they don't do it, and it's important, someone else will. Cf the
> > security team versus testing security support, backports or [...]
> That's fine if "they" don'
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 08:05:33PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I've been delaying this mail for a while now
> Is it purely coincidental that it was sent the same day as your
> nomination for the DPL elections?
Not remotely; I was delaying the
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 12:57:01PM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
> >> We're far beyond trying to help them, at least for me, [...]
> > Your opinions are only ever going to be considered in so far as you're
> > willing to help make them a
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 12:13:03PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> The primary reason why there's only one keyring-maint is the "binary
> blob" problem: [...]
> [...]
> This issue has been mentioned briefly in the past a few times, but to
> the best of my knowledge, n
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 10:44:55AM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> So sorry, but I don't buy a single word of your argumentation here.
It wasn't an argument; it was just a statement of things are, as I see
them. In so far as "how things are" isn't well communicated in those
areas, I don't see an
Hi SPI!
As per the thread on debian-project [0] I'm writing to request that SPI
relicense the Debian logos that they hold the copyright to [1] under the
MIT copyright license:
> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
> obtaining a copy of this software and associa
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 07:55:10PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 10:00:25AM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> > Are you so overworked, or are you deliberately "forgetting"? It has
> > been suggested multiple times in the past to use existing or new
> > hardware and add it to th
//db.debian.org/ debian-admin/
* System admin for (root@)
- determined by owner/sponsor of hardware/bandwidth
- responsible for security of machine
- determines who is allowed access to host
- determines what services are provided by host
* Debian Archive Maintainer(
Hey all,
The Google's running a Summer of Code again in 2007, mentoring
organisations need to submit applications between the 5th and 12th
of March.
Announcement:
http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2007/02/speaking-of-summer.html
Deadlines:
http://code.google.com/support/bin/answe
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 03:17:58PM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> FYI, I am running a wanna-build database for hurd-i386, kfreebsd-i386
> and kfreebsd-amd64 on my home server, and running three build daemons,
> two for kfreebsd-i386 (yes, contrary to some official architectures we
> have buildd red
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 10:00:25AM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> >> > > i think someone running more than one autobuilder for more than _two_
> >> > > years now (okay, not for the officical archive, but i see that as
> >> > > nonrelevant here) demonstrats very good that he mets your mentioned
> >> >
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 06:34:16PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 01:13:36PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > -vote dropped
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 03:06:01PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> > > i think someone running more than one autobui
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 08:37:27AM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> On Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 13:13:36 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > -vote dropped
And readded apparently. Do we really have to have these conversations
across multiple lists?
> > > i think someone running more th
-vote dropped
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 03:06:01PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> > Maintaining a buildd isn't trivial, there's:
> >
> > - making sure they don't get rooted, and their builds compromised
> > - keeping the chroot up to date
> > - keeping in sync with w-b / sbuild chan
Grr. I shouldn't be doing this, but I can't help myself. Here's some
counterpoint to some of Raphael's points. Please consider them only
to moderate some of his claims, not necessarily to disagree with them
in principle.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 08:55:10AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> But you're
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 11:57:13PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > The DFSG refers to copyright licensing, it doesn't cover patents or
> > trademarks.
> It actually doesn't refer to any of them specifically. It does talk
>
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 10:03:52AM +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote:
> I have a question. If I understand you correctly you want to put the
> "official use" logo under the MIT license AND enforce it as an
> unregistered trademark so that someone can only use it if "we" (who?)
> authorize it. This sound
Hi all,
Back in October, during the firefox/iceweasel dispute, Branden Robinson
and I expressed a little exasperation on IRC that Debian wasn't really
setting a great example itself in how it licenses its logos. We had a
bit of a chat about that and that resulted in a rough agreement on what
to do
aid:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 06:05:08PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Sven, the mediation was an attempt to help you and the d-i team work
> > together effectively in future. If you don't want to accept it, you
> > don't have to; but if you do, you cannot use it as
ther wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 05:47:36PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 05:38:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 12:44:46AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > > < skipped private comment from Anthony Towns where he
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 01:30:48PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> Indeed, it was her which i had in mind originally, and which i urged Anthony
> as DPL to contact. I was mostly ignored except one post saying "why don't you
> contact them yourself". Do you know her contact info ? Would you like to ask
1 - 100 of 374 matches
Mail list logo
