* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040505 14:10]:
---
The Debian project resolves that it will not compromise on freedom,
and will never knowingly issue another release (excluding point
updates to stable releases) that contains anything in the 'main' or
'contrib' sections which is not
I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
resolution:
--
Reaffirmation of the social contract - priorities are our users and
the free software community
...
community, and we don't intend to blow our guidelines up to full legal
texts, because we
* Raul Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040528 19:25]:
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 03:38:47PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
While we're on the subject of interpretations, the first clause (The
Debian project resolves that it will not compromise on freedom)
constitutes a position statement about an
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
resolution:
--
Reaffirmation of the social contract - priorities are our users and
the free software community
We, Debian, reaffirm that our
On 2004-06-01 09:19:15 +0100 Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
resolution:
Don't you need to sign it?
We know that, as with every guidelines, there are border cases were
where not were.
re-inforce the release policy that was
On Tue, 01 Jun 2004, Andreas Barth wrote:
We, Debian, reaffirm that our priorities are our users and the free
software community. We keep to that, both are our priorities. We
don't intend to give one of them up for the other. We strongly
believe that, in the long run, their interests are the
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
We know that, as with every guidelines, there are border cases were
these guidelines don't really match. We promise to use our common
sense in this case to get to an appropriate result. We will use our
guidelines in a way that
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
For our users, we promise to do regular releases; as a guideline, a
major release of the distribution should happen about once a year.
We vote for more money
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' :
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:15:47AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
course, the Release Manager team is authorized to adjust the release
policy.
So, if this option passes, the RM could just revert it to the
overruled one immediately?
I think I can safely speak for everyone involved in release and
* Don Armstrong ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040601 11:40]:
On Tue, 01 Jun 2004, Andreas Barth wrote:
We, Debian, reaffirm that our priorities are our users and the free
software community. We keep to that, both are our priorities. We
don't intend to give one of them up for the other. We strongly
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040601 11:25]:
On 2004-06-01 09:19:15 +0100 Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
resolution:
Don't you need to sign it?
According to my mail program, it was signed.
We know that, as with
On Jun 01, Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
resolution:
Seconded.
--
ciao, |
Marco | [6555 tr7cnnrfx4XGs]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We vote for more money
And a pony!
--
Sam Eddie Couter | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian Developer| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:31:21AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Objection. Common sense is what tells you that the world is flat.
Common sense tells me that if the world was flat the horizon would always
be obscured.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Reason: Please be specific what you want. As long as a GR doesn't say
that it might touch a foundation document, it doesn't do.
It might be nice if the constitution (or some foundation document)
said this.
As it happens, people
* Raul Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040601 18:10]:
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:39:10AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Reason: Please be specific what you want. As long as a GR doesn't say
that it might touch a foundation document, it doesn't do.
It might be nice if the constitution (or some
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
resolution:
--
Reaffirmation of the social contract - priorities are our users and
the free software community
We, Debian, reaffirm that our
To: to debian-devel removed
Andreas Barth wrote:
* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040505 14:10]:
---
The Debian project resolves that it will not compromise on freedom,
and will never knowingly issue another release (excluding point
updates to stable releases) that contains
* John H. Robinson, IV ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040601 20:55]:
To: to debian-devel removed
Andreas Barth wrote:
* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040505 14:10]:
---
The Debian project resolves that it will not compromise on freedom,
and will never knowingly issue another release
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 06:22:09PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
In my opinion it's as this:
- If a GR has normal majority, and does not conflict with a foundation
document, it's ok.
Until the vote is held, it's not reasonable to act on any specific
outcome for the vote -- we can't know
20 matches
Mail list logo
