-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> Em Sáb, 2006-02-11 às 13:46 -0500, Nathanael Nerode escreveu:
>
> I have one single question... Does copyright law even applies to legal
> agreements and license terms? I'm pretty sure noone can be sued for
> using the terms some
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:35:02AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> That's not correct. The project simply voted not to removed it at that
> time, by defeating the GR. There was no affirmative vote to keep
> non-free as far as I can remember.
That's why we have web archives:
Dropping Option
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 01:16 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Scripsit Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >>>From http://gitmail.sourceforge.net/ :
> >> This piece of software allows to send e-mails to any person
> >> over the net with a fake
On 13-Feb-06, 17:23 (CST), Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> pts-subscribe- but this might be misleading
> nmutrack - but that's not what this really does
> pts-timed-subscribe - messy but might work
> pts-limited-subscribe- confusing
>
> Anyone go
On 13-Feb-06, 14:17 (CST), Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmmm... I still didn't buy this argument... But it has been argued that
> it is not the intent of this license clause and that, because of that,
> it would not be enforceable, as, even the text not saying that, some
> other refer
I'm looking at bug#202866 (http://bugs.debian.org/202866), which
proposes a small script for subscribing to the PTS for a package for a
limited length of time. I'm somewhat at a loss what to call the
script: my ideas are:
pts-subscribe- but this might be misleading
nmutrack
Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> * Jari Aalto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-11 15:08]:
>
>> Package: wnpp
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Owner: Jari Aalto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> * Package name: wmfrog
>> Version : 0.1.6
>> Upstream Author : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> * URL
Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Scripsit Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>>From http://gitmail.sourceforge.net/ :
>> This piece of software allows to send e-mails to any person
>> over the net with a fake email address, and also a fake name.
>
> Is this a feature, even? I
| * Adeodato Simó [Mon, 13 Feb 2006 22:58:24 +0100]:
|
| > And it may fall under the "too buggy that we refuse to support it"
|
| Ah, forgot to say that the code is, at least, full of malloc(FIXED_NUM),
| that afterwards get used without any check for errors.
I've renamed the package to
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 05:09:32PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Feb 13, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > However it whould be great if update-inetd could create a file in
> Many new features in update-inetd would be great, but nobody ever
> finished implementing them.
>
I've been
[Jean-Christophe Dubacq]
> Is non-free not already distributable ? If something is not
> distributable, then it cannot even be in non-free.
non-free is distributable via the Debian FTP sites. However, not all
of it is distributable in other ways:
- some non-free software may have a license gran
* Adeodato Simó [Mon, 13 Feb 2006 22:58:24 +0100]:
> And it may fall under the "too buggy that we refuse to support it"
Ah, forgot to say that the code is, at least, full of malloc(FIXED_NUM),
that afterwards get used without any check for errors.
--
Adeodato Simó
* Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [Mon, 13 Feb 2006 00:39:25 -0200]:
> Sure. People looking for git (see package git) and git (see package
> git-core) will have yet another false positive: an [IMHO!] useless app that
> duplicates functionality present in just about all useful, non-joke MUAs
> under t
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2006-02-13
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Danilo Piazzalunga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: cairomm
Version : 0.5.0
Upstream Authors: Murray Cumming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The cairomm Development Team
* URL : http://
On 13 Feb 2006, Daniel Ruoso uttered the following:
> Em Dom, 2006-02-12 às 09:22 -0600, Manoj Srivastava escreveu:
>> If people who sponsored the second amendment can explain to me why
>> something that prevents me from using SELinux when all I am doing
>> is unpack and copy make sources is deeme
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 05:17:27PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> Em Dom, 2006-02-12 às 09:22 -0600, Manoj Srivastava escreveu:
> > If people who sponsored the second amendment can explain to me
> > why something that prevents me from using SELinux when all I am doing
> > is unpack and copy
Em Dom, 2006-02-12 às 09:22 -0600, Manoj Srivastava escreveu:
> If people who sponsored the second amendment can explain to me
> why something that prevents me from using SELinux when all I am doing
> is unpack and copy make sources is deemed free, I would be, err,
> grateful.
Hmmm... I
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Em Sáb, 2006-02-11 às 13:46 -0500, Nathanael Nerode escreveu:
> > The problem is quite specifically that we have unmodifiable license
> > texts, not unmodifiable license terms. These texts are in Debian,
> > making it technic
Em Sáb, 2006-02-11 às 13:46 -0500, Nathanael Nerode escreveu:
> The problem is quite specifically that we have unmodifiable license
> texts, not unmodifiable license terms. These texts are in Debian,
> making it technically untrue that "Debian will remain 100% free."
I have one single question...
Em Qui, 2006-02-09 às 21:18 -0500, Christopher Martin escreveu:
> To impose the 3:1 requirement requires, beforehand, a judgment concerning
> the DFSG.
And so to remove it... If it's a judgement for one side, it's a
judgement for the other...
> Since no one has found a Secretarial basis for that
Title: Surfynol 104BC
Do you stock in the US a match to Surfynol 104BC? Can you forward pricing, package size, Spec, MSDS and stock locations?
Thank you - Rick @ Kraft Chem 708-345-5200 x 3328
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 07:14:04PM +0100, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> On 13-02-2006 15:38:16, Kevin Mark wrote:
> >there is documentation on the debian.org website for developers under
> >the developers sections. The basic thing is to read about the 'ITP'
> >(intent to package) ,'RFS'
Hi Kevin,
On 13-02-2006 15:38:16, Kevin Mark wrote:
there is documentation on the debian.org website for developers under
the developers sections. The basic thing is to read about the 'ITP'
(intent to package) ,'RFS' request for sponsorship, and possibly the
'NM'(new maintainers) process. To get
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 01:58:09PM +, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> How to I contribute an application to Debian?
>
> I am the developer of the application and it is released under GPL
>
> Regards,
> Michael Rasmussen
>
Hi Michael,
there is documentation on the debian.org website f
Hi Daniel,
thank you!
Daniel Schepler wrote:
> Have you tried just recreating base.tgz with an up-to-date pbuilder?
Ah, no. Cool. I'll have to file a wishlist item against pbuilder to
update its configuration upon update.
Kind regards
T.
--
Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/
--
To
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 10:09:26AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> You said "we *ALL* voted to keep it", which means that every vote cast
> was to keep non-free. In other words, the vote was unanimous.
Oh, whatever, i take back the word 'all' then in that sentence, i guess that
almost everyone under
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 06:03:07PM +0100, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 11:59:42PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
...
> > > I tested 0.9.5 here that destroyed my runtime configuration :)
> > > Probably taking synaptics.h from the driver sources and stripping the
> > >
Michael Rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 13-02-2006 15:49:02, Eduard Bloch wrote:
>>
>> If you are running Debian, use the reportbug tool to file a bug
>> against
>> "wnpp", type RFP and answer its questions. Or just send an email to
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED], containing sth. like:
>>
> Mayb
On 13-02-2006 17:13:24, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
Let's be realistic; an RFP is not really going to change much. I don't
know
any DDs that go through RFPs and package software they wouldn't
otherwise
package.
That is also my experience:-)
A much easier solution would probably be packaging
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 06:12:52PM +0100, Michael Koch wrote:
> Note that "RFP" means "Request for packaging" which is the process for
> getting something into the Debian archive.
Let's be realistic; an RFP is not really going to change much. I don't know
any DDs that go through RFPs and package s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 13, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However it whould be great if update-inetd could create a file in
Many new features in update-inetd would be great, but nobody ever
finished implementing them.
- --
ciao,
Marco
-BEGIN PGP SIGN
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 04:35:31PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 09:23:41AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > I don't see what that has to do with the simple fact of what the vote
> > was about and how it turned out.
>
> So, you think that the vote in itself is the important one
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 04:54:57PM +0100, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
>
> On 13-02-2006 15:49:02, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> >
> >If you are running Debian, use the reportbug tool to file a bug
> >against
> >"wnpp", type RFP and answer its questions. Or just send an email to
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED], containi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
I use the xinetd and like it much if the compatibility mode is switched
off.
However it whould be great if update-inetd could create a file in
/etc/xinetd.d with "disabled = yes". Moreover it whould be nice if
update-inetd could switch service
On 13-02-2006 15:49:02, Eduard Bloch wrote:
If you are running Debian, use the reportbug tool to file a bug
against
"wnpp", type RFP and answer its questions. Or just send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], containing sth. like:
Maybe I was frasing it wrong:-) I have made an application which is n
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 09:23:41AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 03:57:01PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:35:02AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > That's not correct. The project simply voted not to removed it at that
> > > time, by defeating the G
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 03:57:01PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:35:02AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > That's not correct. The project simply voted not to removed it at that
> > time, by defeating the GR. There was no affirmative vote to keep
> > non-free as far as I can
13/02/06 at 15:54, Sven Luther wrote :
In this case, yes, the solution might be to create a "non-free-data"
*distributed* and available in standard.
non-free-distributable section, which CD creators can easy add to
the CDs, and
people wanting pure-free can include.
Is non-free not alread
#include
* Michael Rasmussen [Mon, Feb 13 2006, 01:58:09PM]:
> Hi all,
>
> How to I contribute an application to Debian?
>
> I am the developer of the application and it is released under GPL
If you are running Debian, use the reportbug tool to file a bug against
"wnpp", type RFP and answer its
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:35:02AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 09:22:07AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I want to remind you all, that previous to the two GRs which clarified the
> > meaning of what we must consider free, we had a widely disputed GR on the
> > fate
> > of
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 10:55:57AM +0100, Xavier Roche wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Fonts or documentations are not softwares, for god's sake!
> > everything that is not hardware is software
>
> So a cat is a software, or a hardware ? Do I have to provide the sources
> (t
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 09:22:07AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> I want to remind you all, that previous to the two GRs which clarified the
> meaning of what we must consider free, we had a widely disputed GR on the fate
> of our non-free section, and we all voted to keep it, especially because there
Gentlemen,
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 02:14:56PM +, Brett Parker wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 10:55:57AM +0100, Xavier Roche wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > Fonts or documentations are not softwares, for god's sake!
> > > everything that is not hardware is software
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 10:55:57AM +0100, Xavier Roche wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Fonts or documentations are not softwares, for god's sake!
> > everything that is not hardware is software
>
> So a cat is a software, or a hardware ? Do I have to provide the sources
> (t
Hi all,
How to I contribute an application to Debian?
I am the developer of the application and it is released under GPL
Regards,
Michael Rasmussen
Scripsit Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> First, if I understand correctly, programs linked against this new
> library (which should still be called "libargtable2-0") should have a
> specific ">=" version in their dependencies. This does not currently
> happen.
You are supposed to write an a
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 11:57:24AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> I am maintaining a package (libargtable2, not that it matters). This
> library had a recent backwards compatible interface version upgrade. The
> previous version was 0, and the new version is 1, backwards compatible
> to 0. It got
Xavier Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
>> Nope, but i think those who try to hide the issue of non-free material in
>> main, by insisting that it is not software
>
> Fonts or documentations are not softwares, for god's sake!
They aren't?
There are seve
Hi all,
I am maintaining a package (libargtable2, not that it matters). This
library had a recent backwards compatible interface version upgrade. The
previous version was 0, and the new version is 1, backwards compatible
to 0. It got the version number of "1:1:1" in libtool terms, which
translate
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Fonts or documentations are not softwares, for god's sake!
> everything that is not hardware is software
So a cat is a software, or a hardware ? Do I have to provide the sources
(the DNA full sequence) if I want to give a kitten to someone, following
the
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Thomas Weber wrote:
> Well, there are cases where the differences are totally unclear. Let's
> start with PostScript files, go to interactive PDFs and -- while we are
> at it -- let's think about HTML files with Javascript.
Yes and no. They are clearly documentation in their f
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 09:37:31AM +0100, Xavier Roche wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Nope, but i think those who try to hide the issue of non-free material in
> > main, by insisting that it is not software
>
> Fonts or documentations are not softwares, for god's sake!
every
Le Dimanche 12 Février 2006 20:04, Thomas Viehmann a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I'm seeking advice on the following problem:
> - xvfb-run bails out on nonexistant / not root-owned /tmp/.X11-unix,
> - a/my pbuilder chroot won't have /tmp/.X11-unix,
> - I need some X (xvfb is fine) to build libaqbanking (glad
[Thomas Weber]
> let's think about HTML files with Javascript.
>
> What are these? Documentation, computer programs, both?
To me the much more interesting question is "Given that you can make a
distinction between documentation and other software, why do users of
documentation not deserve the sa
Am Montag, den 13.02.2006, 09:37 +0100 schrieb Xavier Roche:
> But I still consider documentation different than softwares, and don't see
> any major problem regarding the FDL.
Well, there are cases where the differences are totally unclear. Let's
start with PostScript files, go to interactive PDF
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
> Nope, but i think those who try to hide the issue of non-free material in
> main, by insisting that it is not software
Fonts or documentations are not softwares, for god's sake!
> I want to remind you all, that previous to the two GRs which clarified the
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 07:53:39PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 01:46:14PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > The reason I would do this is the same reason I often get so vocal and
> > sometimes angry about these matters: the issue of honesty. I feel that the
> > current s
57 matches
Mail list logo
