On Fri, Oct 31 2008, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> I find it mildly entertaining that this vote did not take place
> because apparently it takes "a couple of days, [...] and sometimes
> longer" [0] to set up an "immediate" vote. I'm sure there were
> very good reasons [1] to not rush things in this pa
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 09:42:30AM +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 07:28:43PM +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > As 2K developers have now seconded this GR, and the GR itself calls for
> > a suspension of a Delegate's decision, an immediate procedural vote is
> > called for if th
On Thu, Oct 30 2008, Robert Millan wrote:
> Option 1 (reaffirm the Social Contract)
> ~~~
>
>1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
> community (Social Contract #4);
>
>2. We acknowledge that we promised to deliver a
Hi,
* Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-10-29 21:06]:
> On Tue, 28 Oct 2008, Peter Palfrader wrote:
>
> > I really dislike the negative tone of the original proposed resolution,
> > so I am thinking of proposing this as an alternative option.
>
> I hereby propose this alternate option/ame
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 8:09 AM, Lucas Nussbaum
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think that your
> formulation for the now-only option in this GR is too complex.
> It mixes many different questions:
> - do you want to thank Joerg Jaspert for raising this
* Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [081029 21:01]:
> I hereby propose this alternate option/amendment and am asking for seconds.
>
> | The Debian Project recognizes that many contributors to the project are
> not
> | working withing established frameworks of Debian and thus are not
> prov
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 09:01:51PM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> | The Debian Project recognizes that many contributors to the project are
> not
> | working withing established frameworks of Debian and thus are not
> provided by
> | the project with as much help as might be possible, usef
On 31/10/08 at 10:13 +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > > So, we right now have an option that effectively stops the proposal as
> > > it is at present.
> > >
> > > I wonder if we should haven an option on the ballot that asks the DAM to
> > > basical
Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (29/10/2008):
> I hereby propose this alternate option/amendment and am asking for seconds.
>
> | The Debian Project recognizes that many contributors to the project are
> not
> | working withing established frameworks of Debian and thus are not
> provided
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 07:28:43PM +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> As 2K developers have now seconded this GR, and the GR itself calls for
> a suspension of a Delegate's decision, an immediate procedural vote is
> called for if the decision is to stand while the GR process is followed,
> as per 4.2.2
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:13:24AM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > > So, we right now have an option that effectively stops the proposal as
> > > it is at present.
> > >
> > > I wonder if we should haven an option on the ballot that asks the DAM to
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Also, I don't think we that are there yet: maybe objections against
Joerg's decision^Hproposal were raised but not addressed (not only on
the process that Joerg followed, but also on the content of his
proposal). Also, we have alternative proposals (Lars' and Raphael's).
Co
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > So, we right now have an option that effectively stops the proposal as
> > it is at present.
> >
> > I wonder if we should haven an option on the ballot that asks the DAM to
> > basically go forward with their idea, explicitly authorizing them to
> >
On 31/10/08 at 09:46 +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Peter Palfrader wrote:
>
> > I hereby propose this alternate option/amendment and am asking for seconds.
> >
> > | The Debian Project recognizes that many contributors to the project are
> > not
> > | working withing e
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> I hereby propose this alternate option/amendment and am asking for seconds.
>
> | The Debian Project recognizes that many contributors to the project are
> not
> | working withing established frameworks of Debian and thus are not
> provided by
>
15 matches
Mail list logo
