On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 12:38:45AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 07:51:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> [...]
> > > But we, Debian developers, can make this confusion vanish, and I
> > > would like to propose that we answer to the valid question quoted
> > > in the second
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 05:02:13PM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 06:40:41PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > 2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress in the kernel firmware
> > > issue; however, it is not yet finally sorted out;
> >
> > So, what progres
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:56:27AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 11:45:54 +0200, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:36:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> , | 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free
> >> softw
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:05:33PM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> I thought accepting the amendment would imply a second, but if this is
> not the case:
In fact, by accepting the amendment, you remain the proposer of the amended
resolution. So you can't second it, the seconds have to come fro
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 00:38:45 +0200, Denis Barbier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 07:51:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: [...]
>> > But we, Debian developers, can make this confusion vanish, and I
>> > would like to propose that we answer to the valid question quoted
>> > in t
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:38:16PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>,
>| 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
>| community (Social Contract #4);
>| 2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress in the kernel
>| firmware issue; however, it is not yet
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 01:38:16PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:36:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> | 4. We give priority to the timely release of Etch over sorting every
> >> | bit out; for this reason, we will t
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 07:51:06PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
[...]
> > But we, Debian developers, can make this confusion vanish, and I
> > would like to propose that we answer to the valid question quoted
> > in the second paragraph above by recalling our Project Leader, as
> > allowed by our Co
On Sun, 24 Sep 2006, Don Armstrong wrote:
> Baring objection, I plan on calling for a vote with a suggested
> balot containing only this option in a few days (no later than
> 09-27).
As the Secretary has indicated that amendment proposed by Frans Pop
would be disparate from this one (and the simil
Hello,
I thought accepting the amendment would imply a second, but if this is
not the case:
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:36:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> ,
> | 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
> | community (Social Contract #4);
> | 2. We acknow
Hello,
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:45:54AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> fs, this is contrary to what we where trying to achieve, i would like to know
> why you seconded this.
What we want to archive, is release etch in time, being installable on
all hardware supported upstream. From the discussion
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 11:45:54 +0200, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:36:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> , | 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free
>> software | community (Social Contract #4); | 2. We acknowledge that
>> there is a
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 06:40:41PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > 2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress in the kernel firmware
> > issue; however, it is not yet finally sorted out;
>
> So, what progress has been made?
For example:
- the firmware_class infrastructure has been adde
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:45:54AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> fs, this is contrary to what we where trying to achieve, i would like to know
> why you seconded this.
Did he ? Frederik accepted the amendment but did not second it as far as
I see.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Imagine a la
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:36:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> | 4. We give priority to the timely release of Etch over sorting every
>> | bit out; for this reason, we will treat removal of sourceless
>> | firmware as a best-effort process, a
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:48:49AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 04:56:40PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> > On 2006-09-27, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 11:36:37AM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> > >> 2. We acknowledge that there is a lo
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 04:56:40PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2006-09-27, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 11:36:37AM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> >> 2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress in the kernel firmware
> >> issue; however, it is not y
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:36:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> ,
> | 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
> | community (Social Contract #4);
> | 2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress in the kernel
> | firmware issue; however, it is not
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:36:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was not aware that Frederik's proposal was for the Debian
> project to give carte blanche to the kernel team to distribute
> whatever the upstream kernel has, even if it is a major regression in
> the freedom
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've previously seconded another amendment, maybe too quickly, and then
considered withdrawing the seconding because of the meeting during next
weekend and the promised new proposal. For that other amendment, it
doesn't matter anyway since it didn't get
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I second the following amendment:
,
| 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
| community (Social Contract #4);
| 2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress in the kernel
| firmware issue; however, it i
21 matches
Mail list logo
