I've decided to step down as the Debian Auditor. I'm not even sure if my
delegation is still current, but in any case, I'm not able to do the job
properly, so I need to give it up.
I think the next DPL welcomes volunteers, so here's what the job
consists of, from my point of view.
1. Join SPI as
Ean Schuessler e...@brainfood.com writes:
Ironically, Bdale *is* warping the results of the vote and applying
an editorial voice to the interpretation of the results.
Umm, why shouldn't Bdale have his opinion about the results? Nowhere
does it say that the (acting) Secretary is the authority to
Joerg Jaspert jo...@debian.org writes:
Or we have 2 vote options, one for 2Q, one for Q. What makes more sense?
Guess changing mine, to avoid confusion/too many options?! (All just
dreaming ahead to a possible vote :) )
I don't think having options for 2Q and Q for resolution sponsoring
makes
Joerg Jaspert jo...@debian.org writes:
a) The constitution gets changed to not require K developers to sponsor
a resolution, but floor(2Q). [see §4.2(1)]
This would mean that you need almost as many sponsors as is required
for the quorum (2Q vs 3Q). I think that is too much. I think
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you're going to do this, there should also be another way than
voting for people to reset their timer. I wouldn't want to see people
having to propose a null vote because they didn't care for any official
votes during the last two years and now find
Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I know, but maybe (but that's sad if we need to do that) we should
have overrides validated by the QA people … *sigh*.
Should the override file have a justification field for each (error)
override? That would help generic DD's going through all
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
] I could use fdisk. Just that on Slackware and Absolute, which I use,
] you can only run fdisk as root. So -- I downloaded util-linux and
makes it sound to me like you should be packaging abs_fdisk separately and
having linhdd Depend: on it; or,
[Trimmed to project only]
Torsten Werner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why don't we handle such problems in a more friendly way?
I think this is a startup time for the DM procedure, and Kartik got
the unfortunate honor of being the first DM with a poor package in the
archive. We don't have any
Steve McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wow, the linhdd package is *special*. Based on initial analysis of
this package, please remove:
* the DM (Kartik Mistry) from the keyring (he clearly needs to learn
more before he should be allowed to upload directly)
I too feel that Kartik should
Kartik Mistry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
linHDD is special, really. I'm talking to upstream regarding this issue.
It contains source of util-linux and fdisk.
Does it really need a modified copy of fdisk? It is a frontend, so I
see zero reason for it needing a backend, or then the package
Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is the point of writing to this list I think that Mr Foo
should not upload. Should these posts be encouraged? Do we want to
read more of them? What is the line which will distinguish sound
opinion from calomny?
That is a good question. As the GR
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I knew this DM thing was broken, but I hadn't understood yet the point
of cluelessness it required to be designed.
Could you enlighten us clueless as to what you find clueless in the DM
system?
--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable
Bart Martens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The good reasons for requesting the removal of inappropriate additions
to the DM keyring are
Why is it better to introduce more work for the DM Keyring team than
ask a simple apology? Also, you are aware that even if multiple DD's
do second your request,
[Please cc me if you trim the replies to -newmaint only, I do follow
-project]
[This relates to the fact that there are currently three non-DD people
in the Debian Maintainer keyring, which is in beta-test, and some
people feel that this should be announced to -newmaint, as per the GR
text. See
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
+ li If the election requires multiple winners, the list of winners is
+created by sorting the list of options by ascending strength.
Why couldn't we just use some STV method for such elections? STV is a
tried and proved method, no need for us
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I feel we're really missing most sorely list-admin teams who will take
care of the social fabric of one list each and are empowered to make
limited short-term changes to preserve it, including updating the list
info pages and small posting bans. We should
Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is the difference between 'a list admin' and 'a small list admin
team' in this situation?
Nothing, really, I just believe in teams in volunteer work, because
then it's more likely that somebody in the team has the time and the
energy to do what's
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I see little to support the notion of a) preemptive action b) private
interventions being something the community would instantly start preferring.
Maybe it should. In social disagreements the fastest way to resolve
problems is if the problem is privately
Barak A. Pearlmutter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(a) Condorcet is not actually gaming resistant in this sense. See
the DH3 pathology for an example.
I still fail to understand how Condorcet with the default option
suffers from the DH3 pathology (I did understand how Condorcet without
the
Barak A. Pearlmutter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is pretty straightforward to add some extra candidates whose
existence causes voters to use up their default option elsewhere on
the ballot, below the dark horse candidate.
I'm still a bit in the dark. Why would a voter want to vote ADXBC
Patrick Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
when I look back to the old days on Undernet back in the late 90s
[snip]
When discussing ad hominem attacks, it's often smart not to make such
attacks yourself.
like Sven you are looking at the wrong end. With a proper conflict
management the first
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
appeal route (an undo GR?) within the project and realise that if we
go barking mad, there is *always* a possibility of Real-Life courts.
I'm intrigued. Considering that Debian Project is a non-legal,
multinational entity, which courts would have what
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
IANAL, but I understand that jurisdiction depends on who, what and
where is involved. This project is a project of some organisations
and they could be taken to court. Various people work on it and they
could be taken to court if they were involved.
Yes, of
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This discussion doesn't belong on debian-policy. The policy maintainers
-policy dropped.
On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 05:19:26PM -0700, CLAY S wrote:
which system is in use. That's not a reasonable assumption, because *Range
Voting rewards attempts at
Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I understand they cannot communicate about _everything_. But a
downtime like that _is_ worth communicating. If they don't understand
You did notice that the DSA team is about to install a request tracker
for issues like you described? I would think
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* have a 3- or 5-member leadership team, selected by the top-leader
but composed from the rest of the winning vote tally, where by winning
I mean those top 3 or top 5 who win over NOTA
* this selection must be based on a public pre-vote and post-vote
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
+pThe Social Committee may ask a Developer to take a particular social
+course of action even if the Developer does not wish to; this requires
+a 3:1 majority./p
OK, what happens if the Developer doesn't take the required course of
action? With
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Think of scale - right now we need 16 people to 'win' the election, and
the seats last twice as long as the leadership seat. It made sense to me -
please say if it doesn't to you.
One question related to the Concordet method: does it fullfill the
Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There might be many small decisions where such a structure is overblown.
In that case, we will adjust the working: maybe have a chairman of the
board who can take small decisions.
The power to make small decisions should be delegated to the people
who
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Did the Finnish Red Cross change from just volunteers to volunteers
and paid staff? If so, how?
I don't know the history of the FRC that well. I do know that there
have been paid staff for at least 50 years.
Unsurprisingly, I don't think FRC publish that info
Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After reading about various issues that arise in Debian on a social level, I
thought about a possible solution: a Developer BTS.
This would, in effect, be a centralized black-list database. I'm
against any such system.
--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The problem with a an ad hoc group is the composition. We need elections
to get it the group be representative and to be accountable.
An ad hoc group would most likely be composed of those people wanting
to work with the issues. Depending on how the group
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, but that would mean that it could have hundreds of members.
That's just not manageable.
You're an optimist, I would think that there are at most a few dozen
interested people in Debian. But yes, in theory you could have as many
member as there are DD's
Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For what ever reason I thought it was a good idea at the time, it
appears folks think its totally evil. I never thought of ebay sellers
comments as evil. But in any case, I shall not purse any future ideas on
this path.
In eBay you don't have to give your
Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
the tech ctte seems to have people use regular email address and
discusses things in public, will the soc-ctte be different? My
idea you say is bad because it follows something like the tech-ctte in
this regard, as I see it, which is the basis for the
Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
myriad flamewars and personal insults. Are they not examples of poor
social skills and are they not part of the great memory called the
internet?
To me, there is a big difference in having various flammable
discussions, including suggestions to the removal
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I also think that a social committee would be a good idea.
Suggestion: why not put up a mailing list (say debian-social) which
would work in the same fashion as debian-legal does? That would avoid
the issue of having an elected body of doing the work,
gregor herrmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why? Because not only my personal experience in NPOs but also the
scientific literature on this subject show that a mix of paid staff
and volunteers in an organization/project leads to
disagreement/conflicts; and that introducing organzational changes
Chuck, James, sorry to flood your mailboxes, please let us know if you
don't wish to receive this discussion directly.
Amaya [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why was there no such negative reaction back in the days where Ximian
hired Gnome developers to do their Gnome work? Why is this so different
Debian Project Secretary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sorry, that is not the intended ruling. The ruling was in
answer to a query about a random group of undelegated developers
changing policy, which would be unconstitutional.
OK, so the constitution allows the DPL to delegate any
Martin Wuertele [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I therefore propose a resolution as defined in section 4.2.2 of the
Do note that such proposals need to be sent to debian-vote to be
effective.
--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) *
* PGP public key
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Instead, after 4-6 weeks beyond the date of the priginal
proposal, allow for 4*K developers to cut the proposal time short
(say, impose a deadline of now + 2 weeks). This means not only that
the interval is large, but a number of developers
[-project readers, we've been discussing how to audit various Debian
assets around the world on -vote]
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
I suspect getting Europe done first, then SPI in October, then getting
around to all the other groups (Linux Australia, Debian Japan, various
Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A GR can definitly override any decision, and restore Sven's commit
access.
Only if the commit access is deemed by the TC to be a technical
question. Well, I guess you could argue that any decision by the TC
that a certain question is not a technical one
Guilherme de S. Pastore [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Really, even though UOL does not respond, does inflicting this kind of
thing on their users seem right? You are punishing people which have
nothing to do with the problem. You have messed with people's work for
no practical reason. You have
Sven Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
their mail client and/or switch to mutt (which is the only mail client I
know which supports MFT).
For the record, Gnus supports MFT too.
--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) *
* PGP public key available
Jean Bouffard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So before I go and download Debian to see if I can get it to work, could you
just tell me if it will work or not?
If you can get the Windows driver for it, it will probably work with
ndiswrapper.
--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable
Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 02:19:29AM -0500, Erinn Clark wrote:
2. Don't flirt with us just because we're women.
Impossible. More than 90% of the worlds men use that as their chief
criteria for choosing who they flirt with. Should Debian now exclude
48 matches
Mail list logo
