On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 09:56:43PM -0600, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> I read it as stating that we assume firmwares to be under a DFSG compliant
> license that does not violate the GPL when linked into the kernel. The
> kernel is GPL and the firmwares may be under a variety of licenses that do
> not v
- "Ean Schuessler" wrote:
> I know that some are fixated on the fact that firmware runs on "some
> other CPU" but I don't buy that line of reasoning. If this firmware
> business passes then I am going to start hunting down some MAME ROMs
> that have lapsed into the public domain. Those ROMs,
- "Steve Langasek" wrote:
> The title of ballot option 5 is a complete fabrication on the part of the
> Secretary that has nothing to do with its text. If option 5 had actually
> said what the title claims it says, then a different supermajority
> requirement might be in order, but that's no
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
If the tarball has changed then how about a 7:2007b~dfsg2-?
That way the filename will differ and no conflict will arise.
I am a bit surprised that a security update requires modifications to
the upstream tar ball.
I would speculate this was a mistake, and the be
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 5:14 AM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Boycotting is unlikely to prevent all ballot options from reaching the
> quorum requirements, and given the inconsistent application of supermajority
> requirements by the secretary it is possible that the vote outcome, as
> determined by t
José Luis Tallón writes:
> Nico Golde wrote:
>> Yes.
>> I see two possibilities here, one option is to get
>> 8:2007b~dfsg-1 unblocked and let this migrate to lenny
>> (there is some weird SONAME change though) or to reupload a
>> +lenny2 version to testing-security again.
>>
> Yuck!
>> Opi
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:23:18PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Debian Project Secretary (13/12/2008):
>>
>>FIRST CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE Lenny Release General Resolution
>>= === = === === = === === ==
>>
>> Voting period starts 00:00:01 UTC on Sund
Nico Golde wrote:
> Yes.
> I see two possibilities here, one option is to get
> 8:2007b~dfsg-1 unblocked and let this migrate to lenny
> (there is some weird SONAME change though) or to reupload a
> +lenny2 version to testing-security again.
>
Yuck!
> Opinions?
>
7:2007b~dfsg-4+lenny2 soun
Le Sunday 14 December 2008 21:19:35 Andreas Barth, vous avez écrit :
> > FD will be a mess, but as I've previously posted, I believe that means
> > that we fail to override a delegate decision and hence the release of
> > lenny proceeds.
>
> Though I agree with that, voting for option 4 is even mor
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > Boycotting is unlikely to prevent all ballot options from reaching the
>
> Yeah Boycotting is silly, that's why I've voted for FD first, my
> "preferred" choices second, the rest third.
So in effect you prefer the options that do not require superm
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 08:14:34PM +, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 08:49:10PM +0900, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Pierre Habouzit
> > wrote:
> > > This vote is nonsensical, and I'm hereby calling people to rank FD first
> > > or to boycott it. This
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Torsten Werner
* Package name: plexus-maven-plugin
Version : 1.3.8
Upstream Author : Codehaus Foundation
* URL : http://plexus.codehaus.org/plexus-maven-plugin/
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Java
Descriptio
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 03:43:24PM -0600, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> > Boycotting is unlikely to prevent all ballot options from reaching the
> > quorum requirements, and given the inconsistent application of supermajority
> > requirements by the secretary it is possible that the vote outcome, as
> >
- "Steve Langasek" wrote:
> Boycotting is unlikely to prevent all ballot options from reaching the
> quorum requirements, and given the inconsistent application of supermajority
> requirements by the secretary it is possible that the vote outcome, as
> determined by the secretary, will not ma
Debian Project Secretary (13/12/2008):
>
>FIRST CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE Lenny Release General Resolution
>= === = === === = === === ==
>
> Voting period starts 00:00:01 UTC on Sunday, December 14th, 2008
> Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on S
[ MFU debian-vote@ ]
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> [ ] Choice 1: Reaffirm the Social Contract
I'm fine with reaffirming the social contract.
> [ ] Choice 2: Allow Lenny to release with proprietary firmware [3:1]
> [ ] Choice 3: Allow Lenny to release with DFSG vi
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [081214 20:42]:
> Pierre Habouzit writes:
>
> > This vote is nonsensical, and I'm hereby calling people to rank FD first
> > or to boycott it. This is a practical joke.
>
> Please vote FD instead of boycotting it unless you actually want every jot
> and tittle of
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 08:49:10PM +0900, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> >> --
> >> Choice 5: Assume blobs comply with GPL unless proven otherwise
> > Why GPL ? Why not BSD ? Why not
Ccing maintainer.
Hi,
* Goswin von Brederlow [2008-12-14 20:14]:
> I run reprepro to create a local mirror for lenny, lenny-security and
> sid. Since I have it setup to put all 3 into a common pool I noticed
> the following:
[...]
> As you can see Lenny-Security has a different orig.tar.gz than
Pierre Habouzit writes:
> This vote is nonsensical, and I'm hereby calling people to rank FD first
> or to boycott it. This is a practical joke.
Please vote FD instead of boycotting it unless you actually want every jot
and tittle of Debian to have source and have all DFSG issues resolved
before
Stefano Zacchiroli schrieb:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:58:57AM +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote:
>> Why is this important mail hidden in -devel? I wouldn't have noticed it
>> if I hadn't read something about this on planet-debian.
>>
>> Shouldn't such important mails about voting go to -announce?
>
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 08:46:39PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
>[...]
> Note that, there is a "long-standing" ITP for pmwiki, maybe you can
> merge them, it's http://bugs.debian.org/330117 and a RFP which is
> merged with #330117 (http://bugs.debian.org/471816).
Sorry ... RFP, not ITP.
Kin
Hi Kristian Paul
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 02:16:37PM -0500, Cristian Paul Peñaranda Rojas wrote:
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Package: pmwiki
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: cristian paul peñaranda rojas
>
> * Package name : pmwiki
> Version : 2.2.0
> Upstream
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package: pmwiki
Severity: wishlist
Owner: cristian paul peñaranda rojas
* Package name: pmwiki
Version : 2.2.0
Upstream Author : Patrick R. Michaud
* URL : http://www.pmwiki.org
License : GPL
Programming Lang: PH
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 12:03:17PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Unless I'm mistaken this shouldn't be [3:1] as it's specifically allowed
> by the § about delegates in the constitution. "Delegates shall take
> decision they see fit". What should be [3:1] is to dis-empower them from
> having such
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:58:57AM +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote:
> Why is this important mail hidden in -devel? I wouldn't have noticed it
> if I hadn't read something about this on planet-debian.
>
> Shouldn't such important mails about voting go to -announce?
http://lists.debian.org/debian-deve
Hi,
I run reprepro to create a local mirror for lenny, lenny-security and
sid. Since I have it setup to put all 3 into a common pool I noticed
the following:
Lenny:
--
Package: uw-imap
Version: 7:2007b~dfsg-3
Files:
b52118669abf422f766d14e3e2d69daa 1608456 uw-imap_2007b~dfsg.orig.tar.gz
Sid
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
>> --
>> Choice 5: Assume blobs comply with GPL unless proven otherwise
>
> Why GPL ? Why not BSD ? Why not "DFSG" ?
I believe this is because the GPL requires source code
> "Eugene" == Eugene V Lyubimkin writes:
Eugene> Hasse Hagen Johansen wrote:
>> I think it would be better to ask which package to use for a
>> virtual if it is installed interactively. In my case actually
>> didn't want exim4 neither citadel - not for a mailserver. In most
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 03:02:17AM +, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> --
> Choice 2: Allow Lenny to release with proprietary firmware [3:1]
> == == = = == === === =
Why on earth doe
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:47:18 -0500
Greg Price wrote:
> * Waseem Daher closed #436140 as unreproducible
> * Tim Abbott fixed #476525, NMU'd by Sam Hartman
> * Evan Broder fixed #507071, NMU'd by Karl Ramm
> * Sam Hartman downgraded #507072
> * Nelson Elhage downgraded #504626 with Sam Hartman
Why is this important mail hidden in -devel? I wouldn't have noticed it
if I hadn't read something about this on planet-debian.
Shouldn't such important mails about voting go to -announce?
Cheers,
Bastian
Debian Project Secretary schrieb:
[...]
--
Bastian Venthur
As of Friday morning there were 109 RC bugs remaining that affected
both testing and unstable. So we held a bug-squashing party today at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, at the office of the
student computing group SIPB.
The BSP was publicized to computer-science students at MIT. About
33 matches
Mail list logo
