On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 05:14:56PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> || On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 01:08:49 -0500
> || Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> km> Hi Folks,
> km> I have updated my diagram on the debian developement model. Any comments
> km> appreciated!
>
> IMHO have one wrong informat
Hi!
I'm coordinator of the braziliam team of DDTP. There are problems in the
server ddtp.debian.org. It isn't replying the emails sent by
translators and reviewers.
There is a thread in the debian-devel about this. We are waiting replies.
About the encodings:
"In all cases you can add a charse
> Mensagem encaminhada
> > De: Stefan Hornburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Para: Serafeim Zanikolas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Assunto: Re: status of the DDTP project?
> > Data: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 21:36:49 +0100
> > On Sat, 8 Jan 2005
Is there anybody with some sugestion to correct the problems? :(
Who is the responsible to administer the ddtp.debian.org?
Notice that there are people wanting to enter in project (See email sent
by Serafeim Zanikolas) and can't, because the server still is with
problems.
[]'s
Em 4/1/2005, "Sa
Is there anybody with some sugestion to correct the problems? :(
Who is the responsible to administer the ddtp.debian.org?
Notice that there are people wanting to enter in project (See email sent
by Serafeim Zanikolas) and can't, because the server still is with
problems.
[]'s
Em 4/1/2005, "Sa
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 06:44:24PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > Imagining myself as a student in this class: I complete the requested
> > assignment, with luck make an A, only to have the prof post it to the
> > internet and then be insulted by perfect strangers as they use my work
> > to fix
On 08-Jan-05, 15:08 (CST), Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is this really called for in changelogs? Note that the bug reports were
> perfectly polite.
Not really called for, but I understand the frustration with people who
have nothing better to do than nag, and (for the second bug) withou
Le samedi 08 janvier 2005 à 18:32 -0500, sean finney a écrit :
> hi there,
>
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:05:15PM +0100, Jérôme Warnier wrote:
> > > Any thoughts?
> > I collected some interesting Debian packaging Web Applications policy
> > drafts some time ago:
> > http://glasnost.beeznest.org/ar
Package: general
Severity: minor
Running: su -c "apt-get --purge remove hello"
Pakketlijsten worden ingelezen... Klaar
Boom van vereisten wordt opgebouwd... Klaar
De volgende pakketten zullen VERWIJDERD worden:
hello*
0 pakketten opgewaardeerd, 0 nieuwe paketten geÃnstalleerd, 1
verwijderen en
hi there,
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:05:15PM +0100, Jérôme Warnier wrote:
> > Any thoughts?
> I collected some interesting Debian packaging Web Applications policy
> drafts some time ago:
> http://glasnost.beeznest.org/articles/184
to throw another link out:
http://people.debian.org/~seanius/pol
Em SÃb, 2005-01-08 Ãs 16:08 -0500, Joey Hess escreveu:
> [...]
> Is this really called for in changelogs? Note that the bug reports were
> perfectly polite.
I completely agree on this. Rudeness, be it gratuitous or in response to
someone else's rudeness is surely not something we want recorded in
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 04:03:37PM +, Will Newton wrote:
> On Saturday 08 Jan 2005 15:46, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> > > And every set top box manufacturer pays for their MPEG-2 (or MPEG-4)
> > > licenses.
> >
> > Those are the patents for the transport mechanisms. Still not the decoders.
>
>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: anagramarama
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Colm Gallagher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.coralquest.com/anagramarama/
* License : GPL
Description : fast paced anagram puzzle game using SDL
Simple
Em Qui, 2005-01-06 Ãs 23:39 -0500, Hubert Chan escreveu:
> Which is sort of stupid, because if you have cupsys-bsd installed, you
> get /usr/bin/lpr too. And someone could make /etc/alternatives/print
> point to that. There must be some better way of detecting which system
> is being used. e.g.
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
Hi
Unfortunately we dont have the time the package needs, so help is
needed. Ideally you should know a bit of C and of Debian Packaging. You
should also know cdrecord/mkisofs and its friends and of course have a
cd burner at home to test stuff. :)
You do not need t
Andrew Suffield wrote:
>* New upstream release (closes: #270944, #277543). It's less than two
> weeks since this was released; may you contract an interesting
> venereal disease.
Is this really called for in changelogs? Note that the bug reports were
perfectly polite.
Here's another
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 19:09:09 +
Serafeim Zanikolas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Happy new year everyone!
>
> Any idea of whether the DDTP project (http://ddtp.debian.org/) is alive? My
> attempts of contacting Michael Bramer and the other DDTP coordinators has
> been fruitless (see below).
>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: saods9
Version : 3.0.3
Upstream Author : William Joye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://hea-www.harvard.edu/RD/ds9/
* License : GPL2
Description : astronomical image tool
DS9 is an application for astrono
Happy new year everyone!
Any idea of whether the DDTP project (http://ddtp.debian.org/) is alive? My
attempts of contacting Michael Bramer and the other DDTP coordinators has
been fruitless (see below).
PS. please CC me as I'm not subscribed in debian-devel
Thanks,
Serafeim
-- Forwar
Hi Nathanael!
You wrote:
> >I do actually use it, so unless anyone else wants to take it, I'd be
> >happy to take it over.
>
> I don't think I'm ready to "take it over" alone at this point, but I also use
> it heavily and would like to help work on it.
Great! I'd like to suggest that we take
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 08:22:47PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> Thing> has a release cycle that's not compatible with a 6 month release
> period"? Say GNOME or KDE? Well, gets in the next
> release. So simple. We are known for missing upstream releases by a
> hair (sarge is almost c
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:46:00PM -0500, William Ballard wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 08:22:47PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > We don't have to go from X.0 to (X+1).0 in 6 months. It's
> > perfectly ok to go from X.0 to X.1.
>
> .1 Releases aren't for adding functionality whic
* Thomas Zimmerman:
> Is that really true? I would love to run "apt-get dist-upgrade" every
> half a year. Currently it doesn't get me much. :) Now, for production
> systems, don't you do some testing *before* you upgrade the OS?
Testing costs time and therefore money. Debian's secret corporat
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 08:22:47PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> We don't have to go from X.0 to (X+1).0 in 6 months. It's perfectly ok
> to go from X.0 to X.1.
.1 Releases aren't for adding functionality which was created after
the .0 release. It's for finishing the stuff you postponed
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:50:04AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Yes, I don't think the release team has any intention of working
> itself ragged to get a second release out 6 months after sarge. I
> also don't think there's any consensus among developers (or users)
> that we *want* to relea
On Saturday 08 Jan 2005 15:46, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > And every set top box manufacturer pays for their MPEG-2 (or MPEG-4)
> > licenses.
>
> Those are the patents for the transport mechanisms. Still not the decoders.
Sigh. You seem to have a talent for picking subjects for argument that you
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 01:01:53PM +, Will Newton wrote:
> On Saturday 08 Jan 2005 12:56, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
>
> > > > It's all encumbered with patents. Encoders *and* decoders.
> > >
> > > Encoders only, not decoders. Decoders for anything probably cannot be
> > > patented.
> >
Le vendredi 07 janvier 2005 à 14:19 +0100, Kees Leune a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I am preparing an ITP for a PHP application that is currently under
> development at my place of employment. While thinking about packaging
> it, I was wondering if there is any PHP application policy or best
> practice. I a
On Saturday 08 Jan 2005 12:56, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> > > It's all encumbered with patents. Encoders *and* decoders.
> >
> > Encoders only, not decoders. Decoders for anything probably cannot be
> > patented.
>
> Really? AFAIR every producent of mobile mp3 player had to pay patent
> gr
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 01:56:43PM +0100, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:06:53PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > > Is only MPEG Layer III patent encumbered ?
> > > > How about the other MPEG stuff ?
> > > > I find it hard to believe that it is all patent-free.
> >
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:06:53PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > Is only MPEG Layer III patent encumbered ?
> > > How about the other MPEG stuff ?
> > > I find it hard to believe that it is all patent-free.
> >
> > It's all encumbered with patents. Encoders *and* decoders.
>
> Encoders onl
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: pwc
Version : 10.0.6a
Upstream Author : Luc Saillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.saillard.org/linux/pwc/
* License : (GPL)
Description : Free Philips USB Webcam driver for Linux that supports VGA
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:32:41AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Is only MPEG Layer III patent encumbered ?
> > How about the other MPEG stuff ?
> > I find it hard to believe that it is all patent-free.
>
> It's all encumbered with patents. Encoders *and* decoders.
Encoders only, not decoders
Bas Zoetokouw wrote:
>I do actually use it, so unless anyone else wants to take it, I'd be
>happy to take it over.
I don't think I'm ready to "take it over" alone at this point, but I also use
it heavily and would like to help work on it.
Nathanael Nerode
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 07:52:22PM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> * Alexander Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050107 19:46]:
>
> > Yes, a legend for the acronyms would be fine.
>
> Oh, I just saw, that your diagramm has a legend. I'm wondering, why I
> didn't noticed it the other day..
>
>
> Y
Florian Weimer wrote:
Is only MPEG Layer III patent encumbered ?
How about the other MPEG stuff ?
I find it hard to believe that it is all patent-free.
It's all encumbered with patents. Encoders *and* decoders.
Yes, but how is then there a ton of MPEG code in debian (Sarge),
but LAME is "banned"
* David BalaÂic:
> Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>Is only MPEG Layer III patent encumbered ?
>>>How about the other MPEG stuff ?
>>>I find it hard to believe that it is all patent-free.
>> It's all encumbered with patents. Encoders *and* decoders.
>
> Yes, but how is then there a ton of MPEG code in de
> Is only MPEG Layer III patent encumbered ?
> How about the other MPEG stuff ?
> I find it hard to believe that it is all patent-free.
It's all encumbered with patents. Encoders *and* decoders.
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
Wouldn't the package be better named "pcrprimer" or something like this?
The fact that it is written in perl seems not to be relevant to
the user. The name "perlprimer" makes me rather think of a primer
(tutorial) for perl.
Hmm, that was my first thought,
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 01:20:02AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> So, you're about 1/4 right. Or, being charitable, if you really meant
> "*only* the Consistency part of ACID" when you said "ACID consistency",
> then you were right but quite misleading.
I know what it means, you're being pedagog
[William Ballard]
> I like my transactions to have ACID consistency and dpkg does not
> have this by design - apt does.
"You keep using that word. I do no think it means what you think it
means." Let's see how ACID-compliant apt install runs are
Atomicity - no. Your install does not, fo
> A 6-month period honestly doesn't allow us much time for new development
> anyway. If all we wanted was a point release of sarge, that'd be fine; but
> I think most people would like to see etch be an improvement over sarge in
> more respects than just hardware driver count, and we have to be re
42 matches
Mail list logo
