Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> with one of you, as with all, there's no point in engaging in debate or
> any kind of civilised discourse.
So ... Why don't you just stop the flaming, if there's no point anyway?
I have the feeling that this would somehow improve the climate of the
discu
Heya,
I second the Amendment fully quoted below.
Marc
> Debian and the GNU Free Documentation License
> =
>
> This is the position of the Debian Project about the GNU Free Documentation
> License as published by the Free Software Foundation:
>
> 1. W
Heya,
Two years ago, Branden Robinson talked about the issue of some tasks in
the project that are neither delegated by the Project leader nor covered
by the Constitution directly. [1] He referenced his platform from 2004
last year (when he was elected), but it seems that nothing has happened
sinc
Anthony Towns writes:
> There are two ways of looking at roles in Debian; as being "maintainer"
> of a resource -- whether that be a package, or a web site, or a system,
> or something else -- and as being a "delegate" of the DPL with specific
> delegated powers.
>
> Traditionally, maintainers hav
Heya,
Though Martin 'Joey' Schulze as stable release manager presents lists of
packages that are accepted into the next stable point release on a
regular basis, they normally are not released "roughly two months after
the last update" (which is the official plan).
Do you know why this doesn't wor
Heya,
Though there are often threads about problems with it on our mailing
lists, the NM process hasn't changed much in the last three or four
years. What do you think about the most common problems (takes too
long, is asking for too broad knowledge)?
Do you think that we need to change the NM ch
Andreas Schuldei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-04 13:06:37]:
>> Though there are often threads about problems with it on our mailing
>> lists, the NM process hasn't changed much in the last three or
Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:06:37PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Though there are often threads about problems with it on our mailing
>> lists, the NM process hasn't changed much in the last three or four
&
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:06:37PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Do you think that we need to change the NM checks?
[...]
> As an example where I think the current situation is suboptimal, the
> current t
Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:06:37PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> 2. Asks for too broad knowledge
>
> It has been suggested several times over the years that we ask too
> many questions of NM candidates. People wa
Anthony Towns writes:
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:02:20PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Though Martin 'Joey' Schulze as stable release manager presents lists of
>> packages that are accepted into the next stable point release on a
>> regu
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> I personally don't think it's a huge issue if those point releases are
> not 100% regular, because for the majority it's security updates, but
> it's still good to have them not too far apart, esp. for those updates
> that are not also alrea
Anthony Towns writes:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 12:18:32AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> After following the thread on here on -vote, I have the impression that
>> this fixes something that's not a problem - as it doesn't reduce the
>> work neede
Heya,
I second the proposal quoted below.
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The application of DFSG#2 to firmware and other data
>
>
> The Debian Project recognizes that access to source code for a work of
> softwar
Hi,
I second this proposal:
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> == BEGIN PROPOSAL =
>
> The Free Software movement is about enabling users to modify the works
> that they use on their computer; about giving users the same
> information that copy
Anthony Towns writes:
> Maintaining a buildd isn't trivial, there's:
>
> - making sure they don't get rooted, and their builds compromised
> - keeping the chroot up to date
> - keeping in sync with w-b / sbuild changes
> - keeping in sync with the infrastructure upstream (building
Hi,
I would be happy to hear answers from all candidates to these questions,
but I expect that they are at least partially answered by the
platforms. Please simply point to them if you included an answer there,
even if they are not online yet.
So, to the questions:
* How important are regular r
Sune Vuorela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 2007-02-27, Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If an ftpmaster was to charge an amount of money to include the new
>> architectures (as was the case for amd64), what would, according to
> Huh? what has been the case for amd64? please enlighten
Sam Hocevar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2007, Stephen Gran wrote:
>> Was that a purposeful attempt to dodge the GNAA question, or did you not
>> understand the question?
>By the way, I hope you are not mistaking me with the individual who
[...]
OK, now I'm curious... We had D
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But, this insistence, which comes after the expulsion procedure against
> me which was restarted the day after i announced my DPL candidacy, while
> i was being utterly silent on the Debian mailing list, gives me a very
> very bad feeling.
Sven, fuck off.
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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 Debian Account Managers (Joerg
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> * multiple Debian developers have requested the individual's
>>> removal for non-spur
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 11:03:50AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The average (in)competence of DDs is what makes me believe that non-DDs
>> shouldn't
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> After that meeting [0], I'd assumed it was in Christoph and Marc's capable
> hands,
... without ever *asking* if that would be true. I assumed this idea to
be dead because last year's discussion on -newmaint showed that most DDs
were against that proposa
Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>(2) As soon as someone is in the DM keyring, a DD can give him
>>upload rights for virtually every package by adding the DM to
>>
Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'm not saying that the DD is malicious, but simply a moron. That
>> happens more often, really.
> OK, the DD is a moron and marks a random package X as a
Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> No. "DD moron allows DM moron to upload crappy packages, noone
>> notices". I'm amazed that you fail to see a problem.
> Ah, you're saying
Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> No, I'm not. Is it so hard to imagine that a DM could maintain (adopt,
>> co-maintain, ...) something and still do a horrible job?
> It isn't. But, as
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:36:46 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> said:
>> (ii) Debian has a QA problem. Sponsorship did nothing to improve
>> it. In fact, I believe sponsorship
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 10:36:46AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> (ii) Debian has a QA problem. Sponsorship did nothing to improve it. In
>> fact, I believe sponsorship to be one of the reasons for it.
&g
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> =
> 5.2. Appointment
>
> 1. The Project Leader is elected by the Developers.
> 2. The election begins [-nine-] {+six+} weeks before the leadership
>post becomes vacant, or (if it is too late already) immediately.
> 3. For the [-f
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 10:36:46AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> ... without ever *asking* if that would be true. I assumed this idea to
>> be dead because last year's discussion on -newmaint showed that mo
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 10:44:00AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Anyway, now Rperl-lover can upload the package on his own, but as a pure
>> perl robot, he is bound to fuck up. After a year, *you* will need t
Dear Debian,
.:%%%:. .:%%%:.
.%'''%. .%'''%.
.%::' ':::%:::' '::%.
%::. Roses are red, .::%
%::. Violets are purple, .::%
'%:: It is today time I said ::%'
'%:. I candidate
Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 11:40:11AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> I would like to point out that I had already resolved not to run for DPL
>> this time due to the small amount of free time available to me in the
Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 05/03/08 at 13:49 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> Also, I fear a bit that if noone
>> candidates, someone I wouldn't like as DPL [1] might throw their hat in
>> the ring 5 minutes before the nomina
Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Nominations are over. It's you, Raphaël and Steve. So... I think your
> opinion here is fundamental: Are you still running?
Yes.
> What is your stand on them (well, yes, I know we don't yet have
> Steve's platform, and that'll be a fundamental point for y
Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What is your plan to ensure your ongoing visibility during your term?
> Do you plan to post regular "bits from the DPL",
Regular reports to the project are planned, not only about DPL
activities, but about anything that is going on in the project and
wasn't
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Will you delegate someone to resolve bugs.debian.org/238245 and
> bugs.debian.org/388141 at long last? That is, get www.debian.org
> to follow the DFSG and to display better copyright statements.
> In particular, delegation seems necessary to avoid bureaucratic
Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Debian is growing bigger everyday. I would like to know if you think
> that it should adapt to its new size, and if yes, how can you help this
> process as a DPL.
Debian has steadily grown in the past few years, at least in respect to
the number of pack
Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 03:21:23PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>>On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, Fabian Fagerholm wrote:
>>> If you were elected DPL for the next term, what would you do about this
>>> GR and when? How would you ensure that the declassification ca
Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Your platform contains the following claim:
>> This can hardly be solved from the outside - but a start would be to
>> not defame these groups as "evil cabals" hindering the rest of the
>> project out of spite.
> Why can "this" not be solved from the outs
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> OTOH, experience shows that enforced addition of new members doesn't
>> work as one would expect.
> What case are you referring to?
>
> I don't th
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[DPLs]
> Because by default we elect nice people, who avoid stepping on people's
> toes.
What, like Overfiend?
Marc
--
BOFH #69:
knot in cables caused data stream to become twisted and kinked
pgpNgu2i9Q8TH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Option 1 (set an upper limit)
> ~
[move stuff to non-free after some time]
I believe this to be a bad idea.
Would we enforce this at the moment, Debian main would be empty, as
glibc (and consequently, all of it's r-build-dep
Peter Palfrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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
> |
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> or that we help our users by moving the Linux
>> kernel plus the installer out of main,
> How is shipping packages in non-free instead of main supposed to be against
> the interests of our users?
You seem to forget that non-free is not a part of Debian.
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 08:08:36AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> Though I agree that the release team cannot put any foundation document
>> aside, I don't think the release team is overriding the social contract,
>> but chooses a certain interpretation (
Manoj Srivastava writes:
> On Tue, Aug 11 2009, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
>> I basically oppose such a GR, as it is is merely speculative (who
>> knows _now_ or at the GR voting time when we will be close to
>> achieving our release goals?), and because it is a ruling on a
>> technical subject (at least
Charles Plessy writes:
> 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 them interesting.
OK, so I do have a few followup q
Charles Plessy writes:
> In this thread it was proposed to trust DDs to nominate other members
> and I found the idea very interesting. In order to make it more
> consensual, there is probably a need for making concessions like
> shortlisting the trusted DDs according to some criteria like the tim
Hi,
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> ---
> The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
> To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
> including but not limited to: package maintenan
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The Debian project,
>
> based on its Social Contract stating that its priorities are its users
> and free software,
>
> recognizing that the AMD64-based architectures are likely to become the
> most widespread on personal computers and workstations in
53 matches
Mail list logo
