Robert Millan wrote:
- Even if there's a general perception that everyone agrees not to delay
Lenny at all costs, this should definitely be voted on and sanctioned.
Not doing so creates a very bad precedent.
You think everyone must be voted on? What exactly do you think these
Robert Millan wrote:
This is far from what one would expect the Secretary to do. If results are
really ambigous, or flawed in any way, what he should do is cancel the vote.
And I'm sure you would have been the first one to cry foul, there being,
after all, no constitutional basis for the
Robert Millan wrote:
Take the exact wording:
This result means that the Debian Lenny release can proceed as the
release team has intended, with the kernel packages currently in the
archive.
and carefully analize this phrase.
I think you are definitely over-anal-izing the situation.
Russ Allbery wrote:
In other words, if non-free is just another archive section, why do we
have this whole distinction? And while we're maintaining this
distinction, I think it's clear that moving something into non-free is
never going to be an action people are willing to take lightly. Since,
MJ Ray wrote:
to reduce GRs, having
another way for developers to ask a question that nearly always gets
answered might help.
Such as, say, writing an email to debian-de...@ldo?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Hi Mike,
as a fellow non-DD Debian user and advocate, I feel...
Mike Bird wrote:
Manoj has been a remarkably astute and unbiased delegate
I would urge the DPL to re-appoint Manoj
...that you've disqualified yourself from commenting on matters
concerning the Debian constitution.
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
The files in this area should not comply with the DFSG #2, #3 and
#4, but should comply with the rest of the the DFSG.
nitpickSo anything that complies with 1 or 2 of these points, but not
all of them, may not be included in the firmware section?/nitpick
s/should not/must
Ean Schuessler wrote:
You know that was not the point of my last message. Condorcet is orthogonal
to the issue. A condorcet vote is just a full run off of options against one
and other conducted via a ranking. The presence of further discussion
effectively provides a we should do this, we
Ean Schuessler wrote:
The point of the super majority was to engrave the social contract in stone. From the
beginning, there was a concern that financial incentives would distort the shape of the
organization and we wanted a safeguard against the system being gamed by a commercial organization
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 07:28:57PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Let's try using some numbers. An md5sum is 16 bytes -- 128 bits.
On average, you need 2^64 samples to find a collision. So you need around
600 million samples per second to find one collision in a year (assuming
you're going for
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 07:28:57PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Let's try using some numbers. An md5sum is 16 bytes -- 128 bits.
On average, you need 2^64 samples to find a collision. So you need around
600 million samples per second to find one collision in a year (assuming
you're going for
11 matches
Mail list logo
