On Wednesday 27 April 2005 07:28, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > I don't care about the information that were posted because I have
> > nothing to hide. I undertook all of that travel (and much more) and
>
> Having nothing to hide is a very bad excuse for leaking private stuff
On Saturday 16 April 2005 00:10, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 11:59:38PM +0200, David Schmitt wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 April 2005 22:32, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 10:17:12PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > > Now imagine
On Thursday 14 April 2005 22:32, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 10:17:12PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Now imagine someone who's doing a study on available algorithms for
> > Fourier transforms, and wants to pick out parts of the text in the
> > invariant section to write his p
On Thursday 07 April 2005 15:15, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Non-developers subscribe to d-d-a to hear & follow DD stuff. I don't
> see there as being any reason for them to piss & moan about there being
> DD stuff on d-d-a, that's just plain silly.
As one of the non-maintaining subscribers to d-d-a,
On Sunday 27 March 2005 22:10, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> Yes there should be accessible documentation for what all the teams are
> upto and electronic systems could automate a lot of that. But eventually
> someone has to monitor the electronic systems and then we are right back
> to square one. Onl
On Monday 14 March 2005 23:57, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> P.S.: I'm not saying I am starting to rewrite it, but I'm considering...
I think I can remember rumours about a major debbugs updated for post-sarge.
Consider contacting debugs' maintainers first.
Regards, David
--
- hallo... wie gehts heut
On Wednesday 02 March 2005 11:39, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 04:45:41PM +0800, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> > * Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-02 09:38]:
> > > I'm surprised that I haven't seen anything about this on the mailing
> > > list
On Saturday 12 February 2005 14:28, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> You missed the point. I'm asking for the rationale about the need
> for more and more key signatures.
The OP stated, that the second signature was needed to protect against a DD
"faking" a second one.
Regards, David
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
As for what could compose the DFDG, there is a farily good set of ideas on
Manoj's page (which are in line with the DFSG):
< begin quote >
Freedoms for Documentation
Analogous to the software program freedoms, we need to articulate the
freedoms required for th
[Please Cc: me since I am not subscribed, I hope mutt figures this out]
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 03:45:18AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Here's the basic idea: turn bug-fixing into a game (a counterbalance
> to the huge quantities of time which moon-buggy and frozen-bubble have
> taken away fro
10 matches
Mail list logo
