Re: SONAME and package version question

[Junichi Uekawa]

Hi,

> > $ dpkg -c librote0_0.2.6-1_i386.deb
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-06-21 22:36:21 ./
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-06-21 22:36:20 ./usr/
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-06-21 22:36:21 ./usr/lib/
> > -rw-r--r-- root/root 13744 2005-06-21 22:36:21 
> > ./usr/lib/librote.so.0.2.6
> > lrwxrwxrwx root/root 0 2005-06-21 22:36:21 ./usr/lib/librote.so.0 
> > -> librote.so.0.2.6
> > 
> > With the patch, the relevant content are:
> > 
> > $ dpkg -c librote0_0.2.6+20050511-1_i386.deb
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-06-22 10:48:51 ./
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-06-22 10:48:51 ./usr/
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2005-06-22 10:48:51 ./usr/lib/
> > -rw-r--r-- root/root 13744 2005-06-22 10:48:51 
> > ./usr/lib/librote.so.0.2.7
> > lrwxrwxrwx root/root 0 2005-06-22 10:48:51 ./usr/lib/librote.so.0 
> > -> librote.so.0.2.7
> > 
> > Is it OK for the last digit in the library to change from 6 to 7?  Do I
> > need to do something about the version number?
> 
> If the SONAME value (displayed by objdump -p) hasn't changed, you don't
> need to change anything. The only thing you have to change is to bump
> the minimal dependency for dh_shlibdeps, if there are new symbols.


I've added reference to this thread to the libpkg-guide.
I've checked libpkg-guide and it wasn't quite correct in 
addressing this situation.



regards,
junichi
-- 
Junichi Uekawa, Debian Developer   http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/
183A 70FC 4732 1B87 57A5  CE82 D837 7D4E E81E 55C1 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies

[Bill Allombert]

On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 02:43:28PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> 
> > 1) foo and foo-data. There is usualy no reason for foo-data to depend on
> > foo. foo-data does not provide user-visible interface, only data, so it
> > does not need to depend on foo.
> 
> However, we have some users randomly filing bugs on 
> foo-data that doesn't get uninstalled if it's no longer useful.

Fix the users, then!

> > 2) libfoo and foo-bin, where foo-bin include binaries linked with
> > libfoo. Usually libfoo only need to Depends on configuration data
> > in foo-bin and not on any binaries linked with libfoo (to avoid infinite
> > recursion). In that case it should be possible to split foo-bin in
> > foo-bin and foo-common, and change libfoo to depend on foo-common
> > instead.
> 
> I'm rather doubtful it should be easy to fix this situation.
> I doubt having configuration data in foo-bin is a good idea,
> since it will generally cause problems when
> libfoo1/libfoo2 needs to coexist.

If it is not a good idea, all the more reason to introduce foo-common ?

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Imagine a large red swirl here. 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Lose extra inches

[Jocelyn]

Body Wrap at Home to lose 6-20 inches in one hour.

With Bodywrap we guarantee:
 you'll lose 6-8 Inches in one hour 
 100% Satisfaction or your money back

Bodywrap is soothing formula that contours, 
cleanses and rejuvenates your body while
reducing inches.

http://irrevocable.incdropfat.com










augite oz crystallographer xvf cant zan acolyte njr landowner zzq emotional rv 
context uf welsh xh deferred ekx buss vp oppressive gj christensen xp 
http://irrevocable.incdropfat.com/r


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

[Shachar Shemesh]

I am not a lawyer.

I am a consultant trying to understand the world he lives in, and as 
such, studied the applicable law a little.


Eric Dorland wrote:


So, I don't feel I can accept the agreement offered by the Mozilla
Foundation, because of my objections to it and because I don't feel
empowered to make an agreement like this on behalf of Debian. If
however, the DPL wished to step forward and broker such a deal I would
not oppose (he is our elected representative for the project after
all). 
 


If the DPL does not step forward to make some sort of agreement, what
will I do? Renaming seems to be a very unpopular option. So I believe
my best option is to ignore the trademark policy altogether and have
the Mozilla Foundation tell us when they want us to stop using their
marks.

It should just be noted that such a move does have consequences as well. 
This is not a no-op move. The no-op move would have been to rename the 
package.



Now I originally said we shouldn't do this, but it does have
certain advantages. First of all, I think we can ignore the trademark
policy because it is only a policy, is not distributed with the
software (although having said that, that might change) and it is my
understanding that in most jurisdictions the trademark holder has to
police use of their trademark anyway. 
 

Quite like the GPL, it boils down to whether we are required, by law, to 
have the MoFo's approval. If we are, then the policy holds true for us. 
If we are not, then not signing an agreement with them is a sane move.



Now the advantage of doing this is foremost to not have to rename
Firefox unless the MoFo ask us to. There is also protects us from
looking like the bad guy in the case of a rename (eg the /. headline
will read "MoFo tells Debian not to use 'Firefox'" rather than "Free
software nuts stop using 'Firefox'").

What it does not protect us from, however, is a lawsuit. I'm not saying 
MoFo would sue, but if they would, it would put the Debian project under 
complete legal liability. Normally, one can claim "innocent 
infringement", which means you are not liable for the infringement done 
prior to becoming aware of the problem. As a side note, this holds true 
for patents as well. In this case, however, we cannot claim that we did 
not know, as this has been discussed on a public forum.



Of course the other advantage is
not having to make an agreement that I think compromises our
principles. 


Of course the disadvantage would be that by ignoring the issue we're
implicitly agreeing to the MoFo's proposal.

No, it's quite worse. By ignoring the issue, we are forcing MoFo to 
either sue us or lose the trademark. That's the way trademark law works. 
Just like we can no longer claim we didn't know these things were 
trademarked, they will not be able to claim they didn't know Debian was 
using their trademarks without an agreement. This means that if they 
don't do something legal to us now, they will never be able to do 
anything regarding their trademark to anyone else ever. In effect, not 
signing the agreement and keeping the name means that we are forcing 
them to sue or lose.


I'm afraid the only way of not taking an active stance on the issue of 
whether free software should have registered trademarks is to rename our 
version of Firefox. If we do not sign and not rename, we are taking an 
anti-trademark stance by forcing MoFo to take legal action against us 
(which will hurt them dearly as well), or to drop the Trademark idea. If 
we do sign the contract we're implicitly saying that we think that the 
MoFo course of action is the right way to go.


To put another way, once MoFo decided to issue a trademark, they have no 
choice BUT to ask Debian to sign such an agreement. Debian is too widely 
used for MoFo to claim they didn't know that we are infringing (and if 
they can't claim that, trademark law says they cannot enforce their 
trademark against anyone else), and they likely don't WANT us to stop 
using the name "Firefox". Both because they likely really do want the 
software to be free, and because that weakens the trademark, not 
strengthens it.


Two important notes:
1. The above is my understanding of trademark law, and does not include 
my opinion as for what we SHOULD do. Not being a Debian Developer (yet), 
I don't think my opinion on the matter matter that much. In any case, 
this is more down to personal beliefs than actual reasoned discussion.
2. I am not a lawyer, so the above may be a distorted view of the real 
state of affairs. The correct thing to do with anything I write on the 
matter is to take it to a real lawyer, and ask his/her opinion about it.


 Shachar

--
Shachar Shemesh
Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd.
Have you backed up today's work? http://www.lingnu.com/backup.html


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Meta-Tag for non-free docs bugs?

[Frank Lichtenheld]

I'm currently planning to organise the removal of non-free documentation
from Debian. There is not yet a timeline for when I plan to do a
mass bug filing but I will try to prepare a list of affected packages soon.

To be able to track the bugs automatically I propose to use some kind
of meta tag in their subjects similar to the [INTL:] tags used
by some l10n teams.

I would go for [NONFREE-DOC:] where  is the acronym of
the license (GFDL, OPL, CC-SA, etc.)

Unless someone objects to this method I will retitle the existing bugs
soon and use this scheme for newly filed bugs.

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

[John Hasler]

Shachar writes:
> No, it's quite worse. By ignoring the issue, we are forcing MoFo to
> either sue us or lose the trademark.

They are not forced to sue.  They need (at most) only send us a
cease-and-desist letter.  They could also decide that our use is
non-infringing and ignore it.

> Just like we can no longer claim we didn't know these things were
> trademarked, they will not be able to claim they didn't know Debian was
> using their trademarks without an agreement.

They did not tell us to stop using the mark immediately upon learning that
we were using it.  That's implicit approval of our use.  They have to tell
us to stop using the mark before they can claim we are infringing it.  If
we obey a cease-and-desist they will have no grounds for a lawsuit.

> This means that if they don't do something legal to us now, they will
> never be able to do anything regarding their trademark to anyone else
> ever.

You assume that our usage is infringing.  I don't think that is
established.
-- 
John Hasler


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

[Shachar Shemesh]

John Hasler wrote:


This means that if they don't do something legal to us now, they will
never be able to do anything regarding their trademark to anyone else
ever.
   



You assume that our usage is infringing.  I don't think that is
established.
 


If our usage is non-infringing, then no contract is necessary.

In other words, I'm only assuming they assume our usage is infringing.

 Shachar

--
Shachar Shemesh
Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd.
Have you backed up today's work? http://www.lingnu.com/backup.html


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#315752: ITP: tailor -- Tool to keep in sync various kinds of repository (CVS, SVN, ...)

[Vincent Danjean]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Vincent Danjean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* Package name: tailor
  Version : 0.0.1 (upstream does not make version for now)1
  Upstream Author : Lele Gaifax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.darcs.net/DarcsWiki/Tailor
* License : GPL
  Description : Tool to keep in sync various kinds of repository (CVS, SVN, 
...)

 Python tool able to keep in sync various kinds of repository: it works
 for various revision control systems, such as  CVS, Subversion, Darcs and
 (still partially) Monotone and Codeville, preserving history.
   
 Homepage: http://www.darcs.net/DarcsWiki/Tailor

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-act
Locale: LANG=C, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#315754: ITP: gkrellm-pmu -- plugin for gkrellm to display battery status on Apple laptops

[Filippo Giunchedi]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Filippo Giunchedi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* Package name: gkrellm-pmu
  Version : 2.4
  Upstream Author : Matthias Grimm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
* URL : http://pbbuttons.sourceforge.net
* License : GPL
  Description : plugin for gkrellm to display battery status on Apple 
laptops

GKrellm-PMU creates a battery display for Apple Powerbook without using
APM frontends. It queries directly /proc/pmu for informations without
using pmud. If pbbuttons is present it is used instead of /proc/pmu for
more accurate informations.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (600, 'unstable'), (550, 'experimental')
Architecture: powerpc (ppc)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.11-powerpc
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DE ISABELLE KONE

[isabelle kone]

De Isabelle Kone
Abidjan ,Cote d'Ivoire.Afrique de l'ouest. 
 
Cher, 
 
Permettez-moi de vous informer de mon désir de l’entre dans le rapport d'affaires avec vous. J’ai eu votre adresse électronique dans l’annuaire de votre pays et après quelque jour de prière, j’ai donc choisi votre nom entre les autres noms et j’ai confiance que je peux faire des affaires avec vous .Je ne dois pas hésiter a me confier a vous pour ces affaires simples et sincères. Je me nommes Isabelle Kone , j’ai 22 ans et la seule fille de défunt Monsieur Martin Kone et Mme Kone ,mon père était très riche et un négociant de cacao à Abidjan, la capitale économique de la Cote d'Ivoire avant qu'il ait été empoisonné par ses associes d'affaires pendant l’une de leur promenade pour discuter d'une affaire de cacao. Avant la mort de mon père le 24 Janvier 2003 dans une clinique prive( PISAM )ici a Abidjan ,il m'a appelé sur son chevet a la clinique et m'a dit qu'il a une somme (USD 7,500,000 dollars Américains)dans un compte bloque dans
 une banque locale ici a Abidjan, et il m'a confirme que je suis l’héritière de la somme en banque et il m'a explique que c’était la raison de cette richesse qu'il a été empoisonné par ses associes d'affaires et que je devrais chercher un associe dans un pays de mon choix ou je transférerai cet argent et l’employé pour le but d'investissement (comme l’investissement dans les Industrie et la gestion de biens Immobiliers). 
Monsieur ,je cherches honorablement votre aide de manière suivente : 
1) Me fournir un compte bancaire ou cet argent serait transféré. 2) Soyez mon gardien parce que je ne connaît rien dans la gestion des fonds. 3) Faire l'arrangement pour que je vienne dans votre pays et garantir mon éducation .
4) Et pour ouvrir un compte pour moi dans votre pays ou ces fonds seront transféré .
Vous pouvez indiquer votre option afin de m'aider à conclue ce transfert et j’ai l’espoir que dans sept jours du temps le transaction sera conclu. Cependant je vous fait l’offre de 15% pour votre engagements et votre récompense des que le transfert est conclu.
Dans l’attente de votre réponse favorable 
Merci. que le bon Dieu vous bénisse
Isabelle Kone

		 
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger 
Téléchargez le ici ! 
 

Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies

[Loïc Minier]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2005, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Following a post to Debian-Devel-Announce, I would like to
> discuss getting rid of circular dependencies.

 FYI, I've removed the galeon/galeon-common in galeon 1.3.21-4 in may,
 and the gedit/gedit-common in 2.10.3-2 (pending an upload).

 Shame on me for not doing this pre-sarge when Nicolas Boullis reported
 the bug.

   Bye,
-- 
Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Neutral President: I have no strong feelings one way or the other."


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: diverting conffiles

[Marc Haber]

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:40:54 +0200, Julien Cristau
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 11:35:17 +0200, Gerrit Pape wrote:
>> On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:08:27PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> > Be aware of the fact that diverting conffiles doesn't work.
>> 
>> Hi, what exactly is the problem with diverting conffiles?
>> 
>See http://bugs.debian.org/58735.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems to be a minor cosmetic issue
of old files left around which can be almost trivially solved with a
cron job, right?

Or is that potential breakage material?

Greetings
Marc

-- 
-- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -
Marc Haber |   " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834

Re: Soliciting keys for the debconf5 key signing party in Helsinki

[Anibal Monsalve Salazar]

On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 12:15:33PM +1000, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
>Hello,
>
>If you intend to participate in the debconf5 key signing party in
>Helsinki, please send your ascii armored public key as explained at
>[0] by Sunday, July 2nd, 2005.
>
>If you have already sent your key and haven't received and
>acknowledgment message, please resend it.
>
>[0] http://www.debconf.org/debconf5/keysigning

A list of names of accepted keys is listed at [1].

[1] http://people.debian.org/~anibal/ksp-dc5-names.txt

Please send your key if you haven't done so. You have a little more
than a week to send it. The deadline is the end of Sunday 2 July
2005 UTC -1200 (the international date line timezone).

Thank you.

Anibal Monsalve Salazar
--
 .''`. Debian GNU/Linux
: :' : Free Operating System
`. `'  http://debian.org/
  `-   http://v7w.com/anibal


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

[Gervase Markham]

Eric Dorland wrote:

* Gervase Markham ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Debian already has rights that their users don't have, the most 
prominent among them being to label a Linux distribution as "Debian" (or 
"official Debian", or whatever it is you guys use). :-)


When I said rights, I meant rights to the software in main. That's
what Debian cares about. I should of been more clear.


So it's OK for Debian to use trademarks to protect their free software 
brand, but not OK for those whose software is included in Debian?



They do have concerns about the trustability of CAcert certs. I'm
mostly convinced they're no worse than other CA's. 


What we have a problem with (in the context of including the cert in 
Firefox) is the fact that CAcert haven't been audited, so the risk of 
including them is unquantifiable. Please see the CAcert list for recent 
discussions on this topic.


Can you please point me to the document where you went and verified
that all your current CA's have been audited and met your CA policy? 


We haven't yet audited the current CAs; the decision was taken (given 
how long it took to develop the policy) to prioritise new CAs. Current 
CAs at least have the evidence of history to back up their trustworthiness.



Here's another situation you might want to consider. What if Debian
decided one of your CA's was not trustworthy and removed it? Would
that be grounds for losing the trademark?


That's a very different issue; we have considered it, of course. The 
answer would probably depend on how used the root was - i.e. how far 
removing it degraded the user experience - combined with the reasons for 
removal. But we haven't thought about this one as hard, because it 
hasn't come up in practice.


Gerv


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

[Gervase Markham]

Eric Dorland wrote:
The thread is petering out 


Only because there's only one of me, and I'm too busy to deal with the 
volume! It's currently ten to midnight and I just got back from speaking 
at a conference in Wolverhampton.



Some very smart developers have come forward to say that trademarks
don't matter with respect to free software. 


I'd certainly disagree with that. I'd say they matter very much. I think 
free software should actively use trademarks for what they are designed 
for - a mark of quality.



Firefox. There is also very little guidance in what would be
acceptable trademark restrictions for a free software project. I hope
there can still be some dialog within Debian and hopefully come up
with some guidelines that developers can accept.


That would be excellent. I hope that my suggestions for managing the 
Firefox trademark would be a starting point for those discussions.



So, I don't feel I can accept the agreement offered by the Mozilla
Foundation, because of my objections to it and because I don't feel
empowered to make an agreement like this on behalf of Debian. 


If you are not empowered, who is?


If the DPL does not step forward to make some sort of agreement, what
will I do? Renaming seems to be a very unpopular option. So I believe
my best option is to ignore the trademark policy altogether and have
the Mozilla Foundation tell us when they want us to stop using their
marks. 


Would you adopt a similar attitude to copyright infringement?

Gerv


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: ftp-master, ftp and db .debian.org moving - hosting sought

[sean finney]

hi,

On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 09:25:12AM +0100, James Troup wrote:
> I'm sorry to say that Debian's hosting of machines at Above.Net has
> come to an end.  Michael Shields and Steve Osborn have hosted critical

sorry to be a stick in the mud about this, but...

why wasn't this brought up *before* it was brought to an end?


sean

-- 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Package distribution, a concept for a modern package distribution

[sean finney]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 06:14:46PM +0200, Otto Wyss wrote:
> The concept is based on an LDAP server (or simiar) as a replacement for
> the Packages file and on a P2P network for package distribution (see
> http://wyodesktop.sourceforge.net/index.php?page=pkgdist.html). IMO it
> would make a lot sense if this concept is discussed at the Debconf5.

i actually wrote something that exported a local mirror/server's Packages.gz
file into an LDAP directory[1], as well as wrote the beginnings of an
add-on method to apt to query this server.  as far as speed/transfer
efficiency goes, we're an order or two of magnitude at the very least.
however, there hasn't seemed to be much interest from others in my
continuing it, so i've been focusing on other things lately.

also, there's a limitation in apt that it expects the list of
packages to be retrieved through the same method as the packages
themselves, which would get a little hairy with LDAP (you don't want to
be holding the packages themselves, in LDAP of course).  there could
be a quick-hack workaround for this by having ldap-ftp/ldap-http methods
that wrap around the ftp/http for the actual fetching, but a real fix
would be to patch apt to allow for this.  such a patch would also make
it easier to distribute the packages list via other methodst too.

anyway if there are more people interested in working on this, i'd be
willing to put my code in cvs/svn and start up an alioth project.


sean

[1] see "Package Lists via LDAP" http://www.debian.org/News/weekly/2004/48/

-- 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

[Russ Allbery]

Gervase Markham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Eric Dorland wrote:

>> So, I don't feel I can accept the agreement offered by the Mozilla
>> Foundation, because of my objections to it and because I don't feel
>> empowered to make an agreement like this on behalf of Debian.

> If you are not empowered, who is?

The Debian Project Leader is, as I understand it, the officer who is
empowered by the Debian Project to make agreements on behalf of the
project.

See , particularly 5.1.4 and
5.1.10, although neither of these are particularly unambiguous in this
area.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: ftp-master, ftp and db .debian.org moving - hosting sought

[Steve Langasek]

On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 07:22:29PM -0400, sean finney wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 09:25:12AM +0100, James Troup wrote:
> > I'm sorry to say that Debian's hosting of machines at Above.Net has
> > come to an end.  Michael Shields and Steve Osborn have hosted critical

> sorry to be a stick in the mud about this, but...

> why wasn't this brought up *before* it was brought to an end?

... because in the sense that this was written, there was no possible way
that anyone *knew* about it before "the end"?

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#315791: ITP: bmp-extra-plugins -- A set of BMP plugins ported from XMMS but not included in the main BMP or XMMS sources

[Mathias Weyland]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist

* Package name: bmp-extra-plugins
  Version : 6180
  Upstream Author : Artur Frysiak 
* URL : http://svn.pld-linux.org/svn/bmp-plugins/trunk/
* License : GPLv2, LGPL
  Description : A set of BMP plugins

bmp-extra-plugins contains the source of a set of plugins for the beep media
player which have been ported from xmms but are not included in the main BMP
or XMMS sources. In particular it provides the following plugins:
.
musepack Play MusePack files (.mpc, .mp+, .mpp)
lirc Control BMP via Linux Infrared Remonte Control
status   Show BMP status in notification area in GNOME/KDE panel
minilcd  Display song info using LCDproc
blursk   Display nice visualization inspired by blur
wmdiscotux   Display dancing Tux
arts Use aRts as sound output
ogg  Write Ogg Voribis file
crossfadeSmooth song change

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.11.11
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Ongoing Firefox (and Thunderbird) Trademark problems

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 02:48:19AM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
[...]
> So, I don't feel I can accept the agreement offered by the Mozilla
> Foundation, because of my objections to it and because I don't feel
> empowered to make an agreement like this on behalf of Debian. 
[...]
> If the DPL does not step forward to make some sort of agreement, what
> will I do? Renaming seems to be a very unpopular option. So I believe
> my best option is to ignore the trademark policy altogether and have
> the Mozilla Foundation tell us when they want us to stop using their
> marks.

I think that would be the worst thing to do. The problem has been
brought up; Debian does not usually ignore such things. Additionally,
accepting the deal does not require much of us -- I think if you
'ignore' the policy, what you'd be doing in practice is to accept the
deal.

You have to make a decision. Many people have told you that they don't
think it's a problem WRT the DFSG to accept this deal, including some
d-legal participants. You disagree, which is your right; but then you
have to accept the consequences and live with them, not try to weasel
out of them by attempting to 'ignore' the trademark policy (which you
can't do anyway).

In any case, since you're the maintainer of the package, the decision is
ultimately yours -- see the Debian Constitution, §3.1, point 1. In other
words, you /are/ empowered to accept or reject this deal; and although I
would prefer that you accept it (since I think it's a reasonable one and
one not in conflict with the DFSG), I would urge you to not keep the
status quo.

-- 
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]