Re: [all candidates] vote time?

2013-03-19 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 10:17:41PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 10:39:17PM +0300, Moray Allan wrote: It appears to me that some DPLs^Wpeople may merely be asking questions that they find interesting and would like to see discussed. While it's nice to see these

Re: [all candidates] lack of women in Debian

2013-03-19 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org [2013-03-19 07:44:32 CET]: But it's also about how we see our project. I would like Debian to be a very welcoming project, and I hate the fact that it's harder for some groups to get involved. Given that the context of this statement is lack of women in

Re: discouraging discussion styles - any cure?

2012-03-14 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Wouter Verhelst wou...@debian.org [2012-03-13 14:11:30 CET]: On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:40:35AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: and there are also people who fight for their right to behave like assholes and belittle scathingly against people that wish for a better communication style

discouraging discussion styles - any cure?

2012-03-13 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
Dear DPL candidates, it happens every now and then, people assume bad faith in mails from others and call their action silly and active tries to sabotage, and there are also people who fight for their right to behave like assholes and belittle scathingly against people that wish for a

Re: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members

2010-09-14 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi! * Stefano Zacchiroli lea...@debian.org [2010-09-14 10:53:46 CEST]: --- The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system. To that end the project

Re: GR: welcome non-packaging contributors as Debian project members

2010-09-14 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi! This time with the key that's still in the keyring, only noticed after sending that I haven't got it replaced in the keyring yet. * Stefano Zacchiroli lea...@debian.org [2010-09-14 10:53:46 CEST]:

Re: No answer for insulting and accusatory emails.

2010-03-24 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
Hi! * Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org [2010-03-24 19:09:32 +0900]: just for the record, I will not answer to insulting or accusatory emails. Some of them may contain interesting questions or comments, though. Please feel free to repeat them in a separate message if you also found

Question to Candidates: Disappearing DPLs?

2010-03-16 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
Hi! I have a question to the candidates: History has shown that DPLs more or less disappear not too long after their period or at least reduce their visible efforts immensly. I wonder where you see the reasons for this trend, what your impression is about it and wether you try to follow

Re: Results for General Resolution: Lenny and resolving DFSG violations

2008-12-29 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Florian Weimer f...@deneb.enyo.de [2008-12-29 15:01:19 CET]: * Theodore Tso: I'm not ashamed at all; I joined before the 1.1 revision to the Debian Social Contract, which I objected to them, and I still object to now. If there was a GR which chainged the Debian Social contract which

Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

2007-06-22 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:22:16PM +0100, Anthony Towns wrote: The NM process is about making new DDs -- who participate fully in the project, and understand and agree with its goals. Not every useful contributor to Debian actually wants that status -- Matthew Garrett's one example of a former

Re: Proposal to delay the decition of the DPL of the withdrawal of the Package Policy Committee delegation

2006-10-26 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
Seconed. * Martin Wuertele [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-10-25 21:40]: I disagree with the Policy delegation decision of our DPL [1] and therefore propose a resolution as defined in section 4.2.2 of the Debian constitution to delay the decision of the Debian Project Leader keeping the Package

Re: GR: GFDL Position Statement

2006-01-18 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au [2006-01-18 11:01]: There are currently two proposals in discussion on debian-vote regarding a position statement on the GNU Free Documentation License. The texts are available at http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001, and discussion can be found by

Re: First Call for votes: General resolution for the handling of the non-free section

2004-03-09 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 21:41]: * Thomas Bushnell, BSG ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040308 21:40]: No, the keep non-free alternative does not contain any provisions limiting future discussion. It is also at best a keep non-free for now option. Yes, thats the way I see it, too.

Re: First Call for votes: General resolution for the handling of the non-free section

2004-03-09 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 21:41]: * Thomas Bushnell, BSG ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040308 21:40]: No, the keep non-free alternative does not contain any provisions limiting future discussion. It is also at best a keep non-free for now option. Yes, thats the way I see it, too.

Re: First Call for votes: General resolution for the handling of the non-free section

2004-03-08 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Debian Project Secretary [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-07 18:55]: [ ] Choice 1: Cease active support of non-free [3:1 majority needed] If one votes that non-free will be purged completely, from what I understand. Right? Which option is: Keep it as long as it has been moved to nonfree.org

Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot

2004-03-08 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-07 14:45]: I was promised that Debian would remain 100% free software. You want to break that promise? Who says so? Why would the keep of non-free somewhere (might it be nonfree.org or our pools) be a break of that promise? non-free is no

Re: First Call for votes: General resolution for the handling of the non-free section

2004-03-08 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
Hi! Thanks, Andreas, for the Cc. Didn't mention that I am not subscribed but I am reading answers in the archives -- though they would be delayed then :) (no, its a real thanks this time, not sarcastic) * Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 11:32]: * Gerfried Fuchs ([EMAIL

Re: First Call for votes: General resolution for the handling of the non-free section

2004-03-08 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Debian Project Secretary [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-07 18:55]: [ ] Choice 1: Cease active support of non-free [3:1 majority needed] If one votes that non-free will be purged completely, from what I understand. Right? Which option is: Keep it as long as it has been moved to nonfree.org

Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot

2004-03-08 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-07 14:45]: I was promised that Debian would remain 100% free software. You want to break that promise? Who says so? Why would the keep of non-free somewhere (might it be nonfree.org or our pools) be a break of that promise? non-free is no

Re: First Call for votes: General resolution for the handling of the non-free section

2004-03-08 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
Hi! Thanks, Andreas, for the Cc. Didn't mention that I am not subscribed but I am reading answers in the archives -- though they would be delayed then :) (no, its a real thanks this time, not sarcastic) * Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 11:32]: * Gerfried Fuchs ([EMAIL

Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot

2004-03-08 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 13:37]: At present, I have no such need for that hardware. If you do, then I think you should help to fix that bug, instead of writing to us about how unfair it is that some of us don't want to support a bug of someone else's driver any more. Ah the

Re: Bug#187864: www.debian.org: 2003 DPL election page claims that someone failed to meet quorum

2003-04-10 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Jochen Voss [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-04-09 19:30]: Maybe we could replace the sentence in question with All candiates met the quorum requirement? I think this would be much less confusing. Especially for me as a translator for I don't grok the current sentence :) Have fun, Alfie -- Wozu