-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Millan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 10:27:19PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
>> License and copyright are one and the same.
>>
>> GPL license relies on copyright law, just like almost any other open
>> source license there is, be it BSD, Artistic
Quoting Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org):
> > http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep4/#index7h2
> > "During the transition, those bugs will remain. After the transition,
> > those bugs will go away so there should be no need for a closure
> > method. We’ll need to rely on i18n.debian.org for translation
Neil Williams writes:
> No, the consensus - as expressed by myself and Manoj in this thread
> and by the vast majority of debian/copyright files on your own system
> - is that debian/copyright is primarily about the licences.
Thank you for explaining your position; I think I understand you bette
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Eric Evans
* Package name: thrift
Version : 0.0.1
Upstream Author : Apache Software Foundation
* URL : http://incubator.apache.org/thrift/
* License : Apache 2.0
Programming Lang: C++, C#, Perl, Python, Java, Ruby, et
On Apr 15, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> what feature provided by dash is being deprecated?
You are the one who started the thread. Please come back when you will
actually know what you are proposing exactly.
> Like Russ said, if there's any feature not covered by policy that is
> reasonable to be r
Marco d'Itri wrote:
[...]
> The point is not to eliminate bashism but dashism, and so far there are
> no demonstrated benefits to deprecating features available in dash but
> not in posh.
>
what feature provided by dash is being deprecated?
Like Russ said, if there's any feature not covered by pol
Sune Vuorela writes:
> I do wish that you would once try to look into the problems at hand
That *is* what I'm doing.
--
\ “When I wake up in the morning, I just can't get started until |
`\ I've had that first, piping hot pot of coffee. Oh, I've tried |
_o__)
On 2009-04-14, Ben Finney wrote:
> Sune Vuorela writes:
>
>> How is your work on a useful summary of kdebase-workspace going ?
>
> I do wish this tiresome rhetorical non-argument would stop cropping up.
I do wish that you would once try to look into the problems at hand
before telling other peop
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 08:50:58 +1000
Ben Finney wrote:
> Neil Williams writes:
>
> > Consensus can also be gleaned from the common practice of packages
> > already in main. It is extremely common to find debian/copyright
> > contains a single list of copyright holder details and a single
> > lice
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 08:10:12 +1000
Ben Finney wrote:
> Neil Williams writes:
>
> > Because it's a useless waste of time to make a spurious distinction
> > where none needs to exist.
>
> We seem to largely be talking past each other.
>
> > Unless the files are under different licences, there i
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:42:30 +0200
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Neil Williams (14/04/2009):
> > > > http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep4/#index9h2
> > >
> > > You probably need to clarify in your DEP what “initial” means.
> >
> > This section covers part of that:
> > http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep4/#in
On Tue, Apr 14 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ben Finney writes:
>> Matthias Julius writes:
>
>>> It is exactly what you would get if someone would merge the three files
>>> into one. Suddenly, the copyright statements cover the whole of the
>>> contents of all three files and you couldn't knwow an
Neil Williams writes:
> Consensus can also be gleaned from the common practice of packages
> already in main. It is extremely common to find debian/copyright
> contains a single list of copyright holder details and a single
> licence statement, no matter how those copyright details are actually
>
Sune Vuorela writes:
> How is your work on a useful summary of kdebase-workspace going ?
I do wish this tiresome rhetorical non-argument would stop cropping up.
Are we not able to discuss the purpose of ‘debian/copyright’ without the
false dichotomy of “have you solved all the problems yet”?
--
On 2009-04-14, Ben Finney wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>
>> If we wanted to be absolutely faithful in preserving all information
>> about upstream copyright and licensing in the debian/copyright file,
>> we could just put a tarball of the entire upstream source in there.
>
> That, too, would IMO
Russ Allbery writes:
> If we wanted to be absolutely faithful in preserving all information
> about upstream copyright and licensing in the debian/copyright file,
> we could just put a tarball of the entire upstream source in there.
That, too, would IMO fail the “usefully preserve” test. I had b
Neil Williams writes:
> Because it's a useless waste of time to make a spurious distinction
> where none needs to exist.
We seem to largely be talking past each other.
> Unless the files are under different licences, there is no reason to
> subdivide the copyright statements.
This, though, see
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Owner: Tzafrir Cohen
* Package Name: dahdi-firmware
Version : 2.1.0.4
Upstream Author : Digium Inc., Xorcom Inc.
* URL : http://asterisk.org/
* License : Non-free, distributable.
* Des
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Owner: Tzafrir Cohen
* Package Name: openr2
Version : 1.1.0
Upstream Author : Moisés Silva
* URL : http://www.libopenr2.org/
* License : LGPL2 (mostly LGPL2+)
* Programming Lang: C
*
Le mardi 14 avril 2009 à 22:45 +0200, Santiago Vila a écrit :
> In either case, the genie is now out of the bottle.
>
> The file /etc/debian_version for lenny will contain, from now on,
> a string of the form 5.0.n where n is an integer number.
>
> If this causes breakage, let us fix such breakag
Le mardi 14 avril 2009 à 22:52 +0200, Luk Claes a écrit :
> > There were warnings since December 2007 [1], though you're right that a
> > reminder would not have been bad.
> [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/12/msg00742.html
My bad then, I should have noticed that at the time it was r
Luk Claes wrote:
> Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> Hi Josselin
>
>> the point release of lenny contains a change to /etc/debian_version.
>> This was done without any kind of warning, despite the fact that some
>> packages rely on the contents of this file.
>
> There were warnings since Decemb
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Josselin
> the point release of lenny contains a change to /etc/debian_version.
> This was done without any kind of warning, despite the fact that some
> packages rely on the contents of this file.
There were warnings since December 2007 [1], though you're right
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the point release of lenny contains a change to /etc/debian_version.
> This was done without any kind of warning, despite the fact that some
> packages rely on the contents of this file.
This change was also a surprise to me. I knew that the
Neil Williams (14/04/2009):
> > > http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep4/#index9h2
> >
> > You probably need to clarify in your DEP what “initial” means.
>
> This section covers part of that:
> http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep4/#index9h2
>
> "When the maintainer makes a new release, foo1.2.3-5, which in
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:15:56 +0200
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> That said, it looks like that having things just work on the desktop
> require hal anyway and I fail to see why we would have to reinvent
> other solutions (like continuing to maintain/create many hacks in
> acpi-support) when we could c
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 21:10:16 +0200
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Neil Williams (14/04/2009):
> > > Any reason not to make that “sourceful uploads”?
> >
> > Well, the maintainer will be making the initial TDeb upload
> > (effectively +t0) so the restriction does normally only affect
> > non-maintaine
Hi,
the point release of lenny contains a change to /etc/debian_version.
This was done without any kind of warning, despite the fact that some
packages rely on the contents of this file.
Thanks for wasting people’s time.
--
.''`. Debian 5.0 "Lenny" has been released!
: :' :
`. `' Last n
Ben Finney writes:
> Matthias Julius writes:
>> It is exactly what you would get if someone would merge the three files
>> into one. Suddenly, the copyright statements cover the whole of the
>> contents of all three files and you couldn't knwow anymore what is by
>> whom. Would the copyright sta
[ Since you seem to like redundant stuff: GO AWAY WITH YOUR PRIVATE
REPLIES. GUESS WHAT, I READ THE LIST, OTHERWISE I WOULDN'T HAVE
ANSWERED. ]
Neil Williams (14/04/2009):
> > Any reason not to make that “sourceful uploads”?
>
> Well, the maintainer will be making the initial TDeb upload
> (
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:25:50 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, David Paleino wrote:
> > From 1.5.9-1 then, if the user doesn't add herself to the `netdev'
> > group, the GUI won't start up, firing DBus errors (#516767 is a
> > clear example).
>
> Regardless of what debconf questi
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:04:14 +0200
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Neil Williams (14/04/2009):
> > This is where the Draft TDeb Specification, created at the
> > ftp-master/i18n meeting in Extremadura, will be developed and improved.
> > Motivation
> >
> >1. Updates to translations should not requ
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, David Paleino wrote:
> From 1.5.9-1 then, if the user doesn't add herself to the `netdev'
> group, the GUI won't start up, firing DBus errors (#516767 is a
> clear example).
Regardless of what debconf questions are asked, the GUI should error
out in such cases before it tries
Neil Williams (14/04/2009):
> This is where the Draft TDeb Specification, created at the
> ftp-master/i18n meeting in Extremadura, will be developed and improved.
> Motivation
>
>1. Updates to translations should not require source NMU’s.
Any reason not to make that “sourceful uploads”?
Mra
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:29:17 +0200
Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:49:53AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > If replying from the -policy list, please keep either me or -devel
> > CC'd. I'm subscribed to both -devel and -i18n. Thanks.
> >
> > I've updated DEP-4 to include more c
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:49:53AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> If replying from the -policy list, please keep either me or -devel
> CC'd. I'm subscribed to both -devel and -i18n. Thanks.
>
> I've updated DEP-4 to include more content around some of the issues
> raised so far.
>
> http://dep.deb
Hello -devel,
please keep the bugreport (and its submitter) CCed -- (and the FSO team if it's
relevant)
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:00:08 +0200, Salvo wrote:
> Debconf could show a question for add selected users to the netdev
> group, and then reload dbus service.
This bug is related to the "wicd" p
[ Sorry for _little_ OT comment ]
On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 10:32, Roger Preston wrote:
> I am interested what you guys are doing with this new operating system.
^^^
Yes, besides the fact that it began in 1993 it is always new. :)
> I am keen to wo
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 03:27:01PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:32:13AM +, Roger Preston wrote:
> > I am keen to work for/with a Linux development group, though am not
> > sure where to start.
I'd start by asking what your major interests are. There's a lot
of fre
Ben Finney writes:
> Matthias Julius writes:
>
>> It is exactly what you would get if someone would merge the three
>> files into one. Suddenly, the copyright statements cover the whole of
>> the contents of all three files and you couldn't knwow anymore what is
>> by whom. Would the copyright s
Hello
I am interested in purchasing some of your products, I will like to know
if you can ship directly to NEW ZEALAND , I also want you to know my
mode of payment for this order is via Credit Card. Get back to me if you
can ship to that destination and also if you accept the payment type I
ind
Noah Slater writes:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 07:27:33PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
>> > Does Files: *.c mean that everything below applies equally to all
>> > files that match the pattern or does it mean that the statement
>> > includes a summary of all files that match the pattern?
>>
>> Before t
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 23:54:24 +1000
Ben Finney wrote:
> Matthias Julius writes:
>
> > It is exactly what you would get if someone would merge the three
> > files into one. Suddenly, the copyright statements cover the whole of
> > the contents of all three files and you couldn't knwow anymore wha
Matthias Julius writes:
> It is exactly what you would get if someone would merge the three
> files into one. Suddenly, the copyright statements cover the whole of
> the contents of all three files and you couldn't knwow anymore what is
> by whom. Would the copyright statement be less true?
But,
Philipp Kern (14/04/2009):
> there are some news from the autobuilding front that may be of your
> interest:
o<
> State of the software packages used on the buildds
> ==
>
> This is part of the plan to unify those buildds to use one common set
> o
Ben Finney writes:
> This seems a useful summary:
>
> Neil Williams writes:
>
>> AFAICT it is perfectly acceptable for debian/copyright to collapse
>> those to:
>>
>> > Files: *.c
>> > Copyright: 2006, 2008 Mr. X
>> > Copyright: 2005 Mr. Y
>> > License: GPL2+
>>
>> There is no collapsing o
Hi,
thank you for your interest in Debian.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:32:13AM +, Roger Preston wrote:
> I am keen to work for/with a Linux development group, though am not
> sure where to start.
Besides things like translating, maintaining the Debian website and
reporting bugs there are basi
Hi there,
there are some news from the autobuilding front that may be of your interest:
State of the software packages used on the buildds
==
For those who wonder where the UTF-8'ed build logs come from that appeared
on buildd.debian.org since abou
Hi,
once we are at renaming issues: IMHO we should simply close this bug report.
I fail to se a real problem here. There is only one binary /usr/bin/muscle
so there is no conflict regarding policy and the fact that package names
are quite similar is not really nice but they are definitely distin
Hi,
I try to resume the thread about the name of plink binary in Debian to
finally find a solution. Status:
1. we can not use /usr/bin/plink because of the name
conflict with the putty tool
2. plink executable will be moved to /usr/lib/plink/plink
3. we use a symlink to this place und
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:52:55PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> The threshold is fuzzy - it's constructed from an abstract sense of
> what the maintainer feels is suitable and what the upstream decide to
> put into particular files, commonly AUTHORS. Upstream do not include
> the copyright details
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 07:27:33PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Does Files: *.c mean that everything below applies equally to all
> > files that match the pattern or does it mean that the statement
> > includes a summary of all files that match the pattern?
>
> Before this thread, I was under the u
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:27:33 +1000
Ben Finney wrote:
> This seems a useful summary:
>
> Neil Williams writes:
>
> > Does Files: *.c mean that everything below applies equally to all
> > files that match the pattern or does it mean that the statement
> > includes a summary of all files that mat
On Di, 14 Apr 2009, Norbert Preining wrote:
> - Do we need any special control entries (breaks, suggests, etc) in the
> new package? (current debian/control attached)
Forgot that one, and found that there is a bug in the current control
file, under package install-info I still have
Repla
If replying from the -policy list, please keep either me or -devel
CC'd. I'm subscribed to both -devel and -i18n. Thanks.
I've updated DEP-4 to include more content around some of the issues
raised so far.
http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep4/
I've also done some more work on the dpkg support and it
Hi all,
On Di, 14 Apr 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> We should file those bugs now with an explanation of the problem.
> You should also upload texinfo/i-i now given that it has to go through
> NEW.
Ok, still a review from someone else would be nice.
Before uploading two questions:
- Do we nee
Dear Debian,
I am interested what you guys are doing with this new operating system.
I am keen to work for/with a Linux development group, though am not sure where
to start.
I would describe myself as a competent C++ programmer, though perhaps not quite
at your levels yet.
I would really a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Games Team
* Package name: tuxanci
Version : 0.21.0
Upstream Author : Tomáš Chvátal (scarab)
* URL : http://www.tuxanci.org/
* License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: C
Description : czechoslovak multiplatform
X-Debbugs-Cc: sarge...@die-welt.net, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Debian Games Team
* Package name: tuxanci
Version : 0.21.0
Upstream Author : Tomáš Chvátal (scarab)
* URL : http://www.tuxanci.org/
* License : GPL-2+
This seems a useful summary:
Neil Williams writes:
> Does Files: *.c mean that everything below applies equally to all
> files that match the pattern or does it mean that the statement
> includes a summary of all files that match the pattern?
Before this thread, I was under the unquestioning as
On Apr 14, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Beside "local" per se, what is exactly the problem? If you badly need
> bash-specific features you can use /bin/bash as the interpreter.
Every deviation from upstream has a cost, which needs to be justified
by a cost-benefits analisys.
The point is not to el
Samuel Thibault writes:
> Giacomo Catenazzi, le Wed 08 Apr 2009 19:47:55 +0200, a écrit :
>> Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> >> I installed grub (and Debian). Trying the Windows hidden partition
>> >> (to install windows), grub stopped working (it was rescue mode, but
>> >> without capability to rescue
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 09:35:37PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > * Bashisms-free archive
> This is useless. You are basically proposing to remove every usage of
> "local" and a few other directives for no good reason but at a huge cost.
Beside "local" per se, what is exactly the problem? If you b
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:22:06 +1000
Ben Finney wrote:
> (the discussion seems to have some new wrinkles, so including
> ‘debian-devel’ again)
OK, but probably best to drop -mentors at this stage.
For the benefit of -devel, the original question relates to these
example files:
Files: foo.c
Cop
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package name: ufl
Version: 0.2.0
Upstream authors: Anders Logg and Martin Sandve Alnæs
URL: http://www.fenics.org/wiki/UFL
License: GPL
Description: unified language for form-compilers
UFL (Unified Form Language) is a un
2009/4/13 Josselin Mouette
> Le lundi 13 avril 2009 à 09:57 +0200, Raffaele a écrit :
> > Running gnome-settings-daemon fro cli results in the same error.
> > Removing the user from audio group fixes but on the other side it
> > prevents me to run RT apps.
>
> This looks like a broken GStreamer p
(the discussion seems to have some new wrinkles, so including
‘debian-devel’ again)
Neil Williams writes:
> On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:45:19 +1000
> Ben Finney wrote:
>
> > Matthias Julius writes:
> >
> > > In the light of the recent discussion about debian/copyright on -devel
> > > I am wonderi
67 matches
Mail list logo
