On 12/04/2012 10:36 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mardi 04 décembre 2012 à 13:38 -0600, Gunnar Wolf a écrit :
People, (most of) the Swiss team is pissed with the lack of trust and
lack of respect we have been showing for months already, and that now
some very vocal outsiders (i.e. Debian
On 25.08.2010 13:41, Changwoo Ryu wrote:
2010/8/25 김기찬kkc.sk...@gmail.com:
한국어 ( Korean )
안녕하세요.
한국에서 고등학교를 다니고 있는 학생입니다.
2009년에 Debian을 접하게 되었는데 Radhat 계열보다 쉬운 운용에 감탄하며 사용중이었습니다.
하지만 시중에는 Debian에 관한 책이 없어서 공부하는데 힘들었습니다.
그래서 제 후배들과 Debian을 공부하려는 리눅스유저를 위하여 책을 쓰려고 합니다.
Debian Linux를 영리목적으로
On 12.08.2010 16:28, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 08/12/2010 03:27 PM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On to, 2010-08-12 at 14:59 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 08/12/2010 02:45 PM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
It would be good to have DEP-5 done quite early in the squeeze+1
development cycle to give as much
On 02.08.2010 23:27, Russ Allbery wrote:
Very, very little software is actually truly public domain. US law, for
instance, makes it essentially impossible to place something in the public
domain via any mechanism other than dying and waiting 75 years (or
whatever it is now).
Not really.
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 03:46:13PM +, Clint Adams wrote:
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 04:52:42PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
I don't think traffic shoudl be keep at minimun, it is not a
important list. We don't hide problem, so important things are
send to d-d-a (which is the only
On 10.06.2010 16:16, Clint Adams wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 02:30:51PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
As wrote by Jonas, there is a risk of cabalization.
Good discussion could also start from off-topic bad threads.
I don't care if there's a cabal to discuss whether or not America,
Hy
On 09.06.2010 16:08, Enrico Zini wrote:
Hello,
there is a discussion in debian-private about the role of
debian-private. There is nothing private in that discussion, so I'm
following it up here.
So, some people are advocating in favour of a private mailing list for
DD chatter. The fact that
On 11.01.2010 10:00, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
This would mean adding a little load to buildd.d.o (which, looking at
its current status, is negligible) and slightly increase the security
risks as we now have more buildds connecting to this host. The latter
should not be a problem, as buildds
Steve McIntyre wrote:
1 New hardware / equipment
a The DSA team have a wishlist of new hardware they'd like, along
with a set of donated machines that need configuring and/or
shipping. As far as I'm concerned, so long as the individual
requests here look reasonable then they
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Frans Pop]
b Gnash. Petter is very keen on this, but I'm not so sure. Don't
they have other ways to get funding? Thoughts?
I don't think Debian as a project should sponsor upstream
development. That's up to individual DDs.
A working free software
Martin Wuertele wrote:
Hi Steve!
* Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org [2009-08-24 10:03]:
The main thing I know about file-rc is that it's a corner case that further
breaks upgrade handling when packages need to renumber their symlinks in
/etc/rc?.d. I know embedded is often used as a
Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 06:40:06PM +0200, Sandro Tosi wrote:
THEY STEAL our packages
Uarg. That sentence let me discard everything sensible/intelligent
you might have said in your mail. I often read sentences like that
in the discussion. It makes me sick and
Luk Claes wrote:
time-based freezes
==
For the squeeze release (and future releases), we are considering a
time-based freeze, meaning that the freeze will happen at a predictable
and predetermined time with the release happening at a later time once
the release requirements are
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Mike Hommey wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 01:32:14AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
Ok - then I guess my problem is that the list of names included in
these is so non-notable (and is empty most weeks
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 23/06/09 at 12:55 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 23/06/09 at 12:06 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
No way. Most reports show that a lot of NMs don't know about a lot of
things asked during the NM process. This is true even for those who
are DM
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:30:53AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
- the NEW queue could also be based on peer-review: one could ask one
or two another DDs to certify that the package is OK (licensing-wise)
to be uploaded to unstable. Then
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 10:53 +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
DFSG is a guideline and a target: we must no go far as the nearest point
we reached, but it still a guideline.
Consider:
- we never had a full DFSG Debian (also when DFSG was written)
- we have RC also
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 17:06 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I think this is the core of the disagreement. I do not call it a
temporary override of a foundation document; I call it a temporary
practical consensus between the needs of our users and the needs of
the free
Matthew Johnson wrote:
My goals with changing the membership procedures are:
- To turn NM into a more evolutionary process where some privileges and
rights are granted earlier in the process and the qualifications for
the
later parts are based mainly on the work
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Hi,
I have felt for some time that the low requirement for seconds on General
Resolutions is something that should be fixed. We are over 1000
Developers, if you can't find more than 5 people supporting your idea,
its most probably not worth it taking time of everyone.
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Hi
as the subject says, we are planning to increase the frequency of
dinstall[1] runs. Our current plan is to have 4 runs a day, switching
From the current [07|19]:52 schedule to the new [01|07|13|19]:52
schedule. All times are in UTC.
For the mirror network, this means
Jurij Smakov wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 06:17:45PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Gunnar Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.11.26.1807 +0100]:
And no, it's not Debian's flaw or problem - but Wolfgang's
complaint is IMHO very well in place. It will reach the clueless
HR recruiter, and
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 04:30:31PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Joey Schulze wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
To cite an extreme example, Ingo Juergensman doesn't do packaging
nor anything of the above. Nevertheless, he's an active member of
the Debian
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23 2008, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Joerg nominated teams, not persons.
My and the people involved should be read as
and the number of teams involved.
I don't think nominated is the correct term here. Joerg did
not nominate the secretary
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Developer Status
I start loving more this proposal.
Debian is about developing a free operating system, but there's more
in an operating system than just software and packages. If we want
translators, documentation writers, artists, free software
Joey Schulze wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Developer Status
I start loving more this proposal.
Debian is about developing a free operating system, but there's more
in an operating system than just software and packages. If we want
translators
Joey Schulze wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
To cite an extreme example, Ingo Juergensman doesn't do packaging
nor anything of the above. Nevertheless, he's an active member of
the Debian community for many years (even despite severe problems)
by supporting the m68k port with hosts
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Developer Status
This was initially written by me, then discussed within DAM (so take
us two for we) and then discussed with DSA, FTPMaster,
Keyring-Maint, Secretary, FrontDesk and the DPL.
Reading the proposal and the people involved, I think the
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23 2008, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Reading the proposal and the people involved, I think the
proposal is to complex and bureaucratic and it doesn't
fit to the Debian structure.
If you are not looking at the proposal on its merits, but you
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I think that dilutes the message that those packages are
non-free, and reduces pressure on the authors to release the
documentation under a free license.
main
non-free
programs
documents
firmware
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
I could help to set-up the infrastructure and providing
the non-free.org domain, but I don't think I have enough
infrastructure to handle the machines.
I'm afraid you'd be wasting your time. I don't think the problem is the
domain name hosting non-free. Richard
Russ Allbery wrote:
Giacomo Catenazzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russ Allbery wrote:
I recommend not attributing such judgements to the configuration files
of software packages.
Sorry???
It is more that a configuration file, and BTW the same notation it is
also used by apt. Archive
Robert Millan wrote:
[ adding debian-project ]
On Sun, Aug 03, 2008 at 01:53:54PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Sun, Aug 03, 2008 at 08:28:19AM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
Earliest Eee models fully supported in Lenny
Lenny will release with the atl2 ethernet driver and the non-free
MJ Ray wrote:
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sam's mail was to James, CC the project. Don't you think that it's
a little immature and definitely very premature to discuss the
matter before James sent his own reply?
Yep. Hopefully a reply will come. I also hope there was an attempt
Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 12:28:59PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
I've started occasionally building powerpc non-free packages with a
private sbuild installation (I should set up buildd too, but haven't got
round to it). It's relatively slow work since I need to check the
Hmm
According zurich police web site (from memory), mails written
in this form:
- subject with IMPORTANT/URGENT, capitalized
- capitalized body
- name of some not yet well developed country
- ...
should be taken as nigerian spam, thus deleted immediatly or
ev. reported to police
:-)
36 matches
Mail list logo
