Seconded, with s!judgemen.!judgement.!
Simon
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:28:53PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
>
Seconded, with s!judgemen.!judgement.!
Simon
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:28:53PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
>
Michael Banck wrote:
> However, it is very hard to determine and carve in stone the 'point of
> no return' for a release, especially as we are still experimenting with
> the way we do releases. But I guess we could have the release manager
> officially declare a point somewhere in the middle of th
Michael Banck wrote:
> However, it is very hard to determine and carve in stone the 'point of
> no return' for a release, especially as we are still experimenting with
> the way we do releases. But I guess we could have the release manager
> officially declare a point somewhere in the middle of th
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 07:26:46PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 12:51:23AM +0200, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > I do not understand why this is an alternative to many existing
> > proposals and would be on the same ballot.
>
> Does it fail to address the release issues created in t
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 07:26:46PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 12:51:23AM +0200, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > I do not understand why this is an alternative to many existing
> > proposals and would be on the same ballot.
>
> Does it fail to address the release issues created in t
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 12:33:25AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> This is a major factor contributing to my belief that such a transition
> *guide* should not be given the status of a foundation document. I
Foundation documents lay foundations, and I don't see how a "transition"
document lays a f
On Mon, 3 May 2004 16:39:37 -0400, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 12:33:25AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> This is a major factor contributing to my belief that such a
>> transition *guide* should not be given the status of a foundation
>> document. I
> Foun
Hi, I do not understand some of this. Clarification will be most
appreciated.
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
>
I second this proposed foundation document.
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:28:53PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
>
On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 12:51:23AM +0200, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> I do not understand why this is an alternative to many existing
> proposals and would be on the same ballot.
Does it fail to address the release issues created in the last GR?
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 03 May 2004 00:26:49 -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I think this draft is very good, and I am most pleased to second it.
> > So I second this proposed foundation document.
>
> Unfortunately, I can't verify the
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 03 May 2004 00:26:49 -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I think this draft is very good, and I am most pleased to second it.
> > So I second this proposed foundation document.
>
> Unfortunately, I can't verify the
On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 12:51:23AM +0200, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> I do not understand why this is an alternative to many existing
> proposals and would be on the same ballot.
Does it fail to address the release issues created in the last GR?
--
Raul
I second this proposed foundation document.
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:28:53PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
>
Hi, I do not understand some of this. Clarification will be most
appreciated.
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
>
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 12:33:25AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> This is a major factor contributing to my belief that such a transition
> *guide* should not be given the status of a foundation document. I
Foundation documents lay foundations, and I don't see how a "transition"
document lays a f
On Mon, 3 May 2004 16:39:37 -0400, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 12:33:25AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> This is a major factor contributing to my belief that such a
>> transition *guide* should not be given the status of a foundation
>> document. I
> Foun
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I Second it.
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
> change occurs in a foundation document like the soci
I second the attached GR. (but please s/judgemen\./judgement./ before
the vote :) )
Daniel
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:28:53PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tri
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I Second it.
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
> change occurs in a foundation document like the soci
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 08:49:08AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 03 May 2004 00:26:49 -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I think this draft is very good, and I am most pleased to second it.
> > So I second this proposed foundation document.
>
> Unfortunately,
I second the attached GR. (but please s/judgemen\./judgement./ before
the vote :) )
Daniel
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:28:53PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tri
On 03 May 2004 00:26:49 -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I think this draft is very good, and I am most pleased to second it.
> So I second this proposed foundation document.
Unfortunately, I can't verify the signature on this email. Is
it just a failing on my end
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 08:49:08AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 03 May 2004 00:26:49 -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I think this draft is very good, and I am most pleased to second it.
> > So I second this proposed foundation document.
>
> Unfortunately,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here is the current version
This one looks good; I'll second it.
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
>
On 03 May 2004 00:26:49 -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I think this draft is very good, and I am most pleased to second it.
> So I second this proposed foundation document.
Unfortunately, I can't verify the signature on this email. Is
it just a failing on my end
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here is the current version
This one looks good; I'll second it.
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I think this draft is very good, and I am most pleased to second it.
So I second this proposed foundation document.
Excellent work, Manoj!
Thomas
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I think this draft is very good, and I am most pleased to second it.
So I second this proposed foundation document.
Excellent work, Manoj!
Thomas
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
>
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 12:33:25AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Here's a quick stab at the latter:
>
> Unless otherwise specified in the resolution, any resolution which
> modifies the Social Contract or the DFSG shall take effect 6 months
> after ratification, and any stable versions of t
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:03:40PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 2 May 2004 23:17:07 +0200, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to add a
> >> sunset cl
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 12:33:25AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Here's a quick stab at the latter:
>
> Unless otherwise specified in the resolution, any resolution which
> modifies the Social Contract or the DFSG shall take effect 6 months
> after ratification, and any stable versions of t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
I second this proposed foundation document:
__
Transition Guide
A working guide to achieve the transition for changes in Foundation documents
containing e
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:03:40PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 2 May 2004 23:17:07 +0200, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to add a
> >> sunset cl
I second this proposal.
Greetings,
On 2004-05-02 Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the
> list of foundation documents the document attached in this proposal,
> titled "Transition Guide". The context diff follows.
> --
Here is the current version
manoj.
I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
change occurs in a foundation document like the social contract, and
also provides specific remedies to the current dilemm
On Sun, 2 May 2004 23:17:07 +0200, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to add a
>> sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
>> specific reference
On Sun, 2 May 2004 17:59:11 -0400, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> >> We affirm that whenever a change to the Social Contract, or the
>> >> Constitution, takes place, the activities required to provide
>> >> ongoing and proactive support for the Debian user community
>> >> shall conti
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
I second this proposed foundation document:
__
Transition Guide
A working guide to achieve the transition for changes in Foundation documents
containing e
I second this proposal.
Greetings,
On 2004-05-02 Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the
> list of foundation documents the document attached in this proposal,
> titled "Transition Guide". The context diff follows.
> --
Here is the current version
manoj.
I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
change occurs in a foundation document like the social contract, and
also provides specific remedies to the current dilemm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is
On Sun, 2 May 2004 23:17:07 +0200, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to add a
>> sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
>> specific reference
On Sun, 2 May 2004 17:59:11 -0400, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> >> We affirm that whenever a change to the Social Contract, or the
>> >> Constitution, takes place, the activities required to provide
>> >> ongoing and proactive support for the Debian user community
>> >> shall conti
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 03:15:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> On Sun, 2 May 2004 14:59:11 -0400, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >> Meeting our commitments as described in the Social Contact is an
> >> ongoing process. Since we have recently changed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released
On Sun, 02 May 2004 13:15:33 -0500
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
I
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
Great. I've just got one
Hello,
I second this proposal.
cu andreas
On 2004-05-02 Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the
> list of foundation documents the document attached in this proposal,
> titled "Transition Guide". The context dif
On Sun, 2 May 2004 17:00:51 -0400
David B Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 02 May 2004 13:15:33 -0500
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> > add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Gui
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> We affirm that whenever a change to the Social Contract, or the
> >> Constitution, takes place, the activities required to provide
> >> ongoing and proactive support for the Debian user community shall
> >> continue. This includes, but is not neces
On Sun, 2 May 2004 21:01:19 +0200, Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I agree and also second it.
Thanks
> I would still rather like to remove the named release from it and
> keep it as general guideline for the future, but it's quite useful
> the way it is already.
Wel
On Sun, 2 May 2004 14:59:11 -0400, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I really like the new version of this GR, but I noticed a few
> minor problems with it. Since even editorial changes to a
> foundation document require a GR (and a supermajority), I think it's
> best if we clean this
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 03:15:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> On Sun, 2 May 2004 14:59:11 -0400, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >> Meeting our commitments as described in the Social Contact is an
> >> ongoing process. Since we have recently changed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released
On Sun, 02 May 2004 13:15:33 -0500
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
I
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
Great. I've just got one
Hello,
I second this proposal.
cu andreas
On 2004-05-02 Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the
> list of foundation documents the document attached in this proposal,
> titled "Transition Guide". The context dif
Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040502 20:25]:
> > On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> > add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> > specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
> >
>
On Sun, 2 May 2004 17:00:51 -0400
David B Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 02 May 2004 13:15:33 -0500
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> > add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Gui
I really like the new version of this GR, but I noticed a few minor
problems with it. Since even editorial changes to a foundation document
require a GR (and a supermajority), I think it's best if we clean this
up as much as possible before the vote.
Content-Description: Transition Guide
> A
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> We affirm that whenever a change to the Social Contract, or the
> >> Constitution, takes place, the activities required to provide
> >> ongoing and proactive support for the Debian user community shall
> >> continue. This includes, but is not neces
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040502 20:25]:
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
>
> This new version has been
On Sun, 2 May 2004 21:01:19 +0200, Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I agree and also second it.
Thanks
> I would still rather like to remove the named release from it and
> keep it as general guideline for the future, but it's quite useful
> the way it is already.
Wel
On Sun, 2 May 2004 14:59:11 -0400, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I really like the new version of this GR, but I noticed a few
> minor problems with it. Since even editorial changes to a
> foundation document require a GR (and a supermajority), I think it's
> best if we clean this
Hi,
On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
This new version has been proof read by David Harris, and is
in much better shape
Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040502 20:25]:
> > On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> > add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> > specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
> >
>
I really like the new version of this GR, but I noticed a few minor
problems with it. Since even editorial changes to a foundation document
require a GR (and a supermajority), I think it's best if we clean this
up as much as possible before the vote.
Content-Description: Transition Guide
> A
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040502 20:25]:
> On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
> add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
> specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
>
> This new version has been
Hi,
On consultation with the other sponsors, I have decided to
add a sunset clause to the proposed "Transition Guide", so that the
specific references to Sarge are ex-purged after it is released.
This new version has been proof read by David Harris, and is
in much better shape
On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 11:33:01AM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
> The important part of my sentence was the first part - it "covers
> everything". Including actually releasing Sarge, which your proposal
> doesn't :)
A change to the Constitution does have to mention any specific version
of Debian.
I second the following proposed amendment.
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 04:57:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes h
On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 11:33:01AM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
> The important part of my sentence was the first part - it "covers
> everything". Including actually releasing Sarge, which your proposal
> doesn't :)
A change to the Constitution does have to mention any specific version
of Debian.
On 2004-04-30 Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[...]
> I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the
> list of foundation documents the document attached in this proposal,
> titled "Transition Guide"
[...]
I second this proposal.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes have been made.]
>
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 17:46:25 -0500
Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 06:17:40PM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
> > The wordy proposal, while wordy, covers everything - and it also
> > provides rationale and context for the user.
>
> Providing context for the user is
I second the following amendment.
Simon
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 04:57:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes hav
I second the following proposed amendment.
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 04:57:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes h
On 2004-04-30 Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[...]
> I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the
> list of foundation documents the document attached in this proposal,
> titled "Transition Guide"
[...]
I second this proposal.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes have been made.]
>
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 17:46:25 -0500
Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 06:17:40PM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
> > The wordy proposal, while wordy, covers everything - and it also
> > provides rationale and context for the user.
>
> Providing context for the user is
I second the following amendment.
Simon
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 04:57:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes hav
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 05:40:11PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> "Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Organization:srivasta"@debian.org wrote:
> > There is precedence for this gap in ratifying a foundation and
> > implementing the dictats of that document; as Joey Hess reminded me:
>
> I think that th
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 05:16:57PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> In the specific case of General Resolution 2004_003, since that release
> currently in preparation, code named "Sarge", is very close to release,
> and the previously released version is quite out of date, our commitment
> to our u
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 05:40:11PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> "Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Organization:srivasta"@debian.org wrote:
> > There is precedence for this gap in ratifying a foundation and
> > implementing the dictats of that document; as Joey Hess reminded me:
>
> I think that th
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 05:16:57PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> In the specific case of General Resolution 2004_003, since that release
> currently in preparation, code named "Sarge", is very close to release,
> and the previously released version is quite out of date, our commitment
> to our u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes have been made.]
>
>
I second this proposal.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I second this proposal.
Hi,
[This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
believe any substantive changes have been made.]
I second this proposal.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I second this proposal.
Hi,
[This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
believe any substantive changes have been made.]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes have been made.]
>
>
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 05:16:57PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> users and the need to make Debian strictly free. As Raul Miller stated:
I must admit that I'm somewhat embarassed to see my name in this context.
Flattered, but... I don't feel comfortable having my name "enshrined"
in a foundati
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 06:17:40PM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
> The wordy proposal, while wordy, covers everything - and it also
> provides rationale and context for the user.
Providing context for the user is not the job of FD's or the
Constitution, it is the job of supplementary documentation,
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 16:55:41 -0500
Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 03:57:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the list of
> > foundation documents the document attached in this proposal, titled
> > "Tran
Hi,
[This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
believe any substantive changes have been made.]
In order to handle the changes introduced in the GR 2004_003,
I propose we adopt a foundation
I second this proposed option for GR 2004_04
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 16:57:45 -0500
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substa
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 03:57:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I hereby propose that we amend the constitution to add to the list of
> foundation documents the document attached in this proposal, titled
> "Transition Guide"
I'm also not comfortable with adding verbose documentation for solut
"Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Organization:srivasta"@debian.org wrote:
> There is precedence for this gap in ratifying a foundation and
> implementing the dictats of that document; as Joey Hess reminded me:
I think that this document needs some serious editing before it is
suitable as any o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [MY new CVS Emacs seems to have munged th headers, here is a new
> version, with a few typographical errors fixed]
>
> Hi,
>
> In order to handle the changes introduced in the GR 2004_003,
>
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
