Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 05:13:35PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
>> To the DM proposers: Does the suggestion in the current form mean that I
>> will no longer be allowed to sponser anyone out of fear he might become
>> DM and thus said he is capable enough to maintain this
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 07:45:20PM +0100, Anthony Towns wrote:
> == N-M queue =
> Authorised by: AM
This one makes sense. I'd also add the sponsor in the people giving
the ACK.
> == Sponsored Maintainers =
> Authorised by: Sponsor
> Notes: package should generally be co-ma
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Shortly before leaving DebConf someone (whose name I've forgotten,
> sadly) suggested that some sample use cases for the DM process might be
> useful. Here's some that come to my mind:
Another use case that I'd like to mention is the Ubuntu maintain
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>
> What this also does is getting you out of touch with your (possible)
> sponsors, as now you let them upload once, advocate you, then you upload
> following versions yourself. A year later you have a new package and
> need to find a sponsor again, beginning from point zero
On 11057 March 1977, Anthony Towns wrote:
[ In case some of the stuff below is already answered in different mails
- pointing me at them is enough. I just had no time to read all of them,
way too large thread. :) Thanks. ]
> The Debian Project endorses the concept of "Debian Maintainers" with
> l
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 02:50:59PM +0100, Anthony Towns wrote:
> So here's a proposal for the Debian Maintainers idea that's been floating
> around for some time now [...]
> I've used terms like "initial policy" quite a bit -- [...]
Shortly before leaving DebConf someone (whose name I've forgotten
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 10:51:09AM +0200, Sam Hocevar wrote:
> > * the Jetring developers (Joey Hess, Anthony Towns, Christoph Berg)
>What is the rationale for giving this set of people commit rights?
The full list was:
* the Debian Account Managers (Joerg Jaspert, James Troup)
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 05:13:35PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> To the DM proposers: Does the suggestion in the current form mean that I
> will no longer be allowed to sponser anyone out of fear he might become
> DM and thus said he is capable enough to maintain this type of package.
If you up
On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 12:53 +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
> Le Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 09:50:37PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG:
> >
> > > Yes. So, the right solution if I want to help is:
> > > - first I spend a lot of time proving that I'm skilled enough to read
> > > crazy licenses in a language th
* Benjamin BAYART <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070625 13:14]:
> If you read back to the DM proposal, it is clearly stated that a DM is
> not allowed to upload a NEW package. So, the approach is not wanting to
> package&upload anything but a given package.
But licenses are nothing fixed. Upstream can decid
> Interesting - is that talk available somewhere? Neither www.tug.org nor
> uk.tug.org seem to have it.
Sure, here it is:
In issue 21-3 of TUGboat:
http://www.tug.org/TUGboat/Contents/contents21-3.html
The first talk in the list, about FDNTeX. By reading it, you'll find
some ideas that were quit
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 12:53:10PM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
> Le Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 09:50:37PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG:
> > > - then I spend another lot of time proving I'm skilled enough to package
> > > complex stuff unrelated to my current skills (say python stuff, which
> > > I kn
Le Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 09:50:37PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG:
>
> > Yes. So, the right solution if I want to help is:
> > - first I spend a lot of time proving that I'm skilled enough to read
> > crazy licenses in a language that is not mine
>
> No, you only have to do this if you want to pack
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007, Anthony Towns wrote:
> 1) A new keyring will be created, called the "Debian maintainers keyring".
>It will be initially maintained in alioth subversion using the jetring
>tool, with commit priveleges initially assigned to:
>
> [...]
> * the Jetring develo
Benjamin BAYART <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> So here was my practical conclusion: I did send a bug report, useless
>>> during months, and that bug report was used to argue that the package
>>> is
>>> broken and unkaintained and to remove it. Conclusion: reporting on a
>>> un-maintained package i
Benjamin BAYART wrote:
> Another case come back in my mind: pandora. Those fonts have been
> available with TeX since years and years. They have been removed from
> Debian/main for good reasons (wrong license: free for non commercial use).
> In my mind, in such a case, it should be mandatory to mov
>> So here was my practical conclusion: I did send a bug report, useless
>> during months, and that bug report was used to argue that the package
>> is
>> broken and unkaintained and to remove it. Conclusion: reporting on a
>> un-maintained package is something dangerous.
>
>Hm, what was the severi
17 matches
Mail list logo
