On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 01:19:28AM +0100, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Hi Paul,
Heyya, Mike,
>
> Note that finally Python Paramiko has a new upstream[1]. Code gets
> developed on Github[2]. You might want to file an issue about
> Python3 compatibility there.
>
> Greets,
> Mike
>
> [1] http://bitproph
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 12:42:33PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bjørn Mork writes:
>
> > IANAL, but I believe you are wrong there. You give them much wider
> > rights than this by assigning the copyright to the FSF. The copyright
> > owner is free to relicense the work in any way they want.
>
On Dec 05, 2012, at 01:19 AM, Mike Gabriel wrote:
>Note that finally Python Paramiko has a new upstream[1]. Code gets developed
>on Github[2]. You might want to file an issue about Python3 compatibility
>there.
Good to hear about Paramiko. There's already a Python 3 issue open:
https://github.c
Hi Paul,
On Di 04 Dez 2012 23:16:17 CET Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 11:00:35PM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 04.12.2012, 15:07 -0500 schrieb Paul Tagliamonte:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 02:58:54PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > On Dec 04, 2012, at 02:29 PM, P
On 04.12.2012 20:40, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>> What are the chances of dput-ng becoming available in backports (well, once
>> we
>> release, backported to wheezy at least)?
>
> Erm, I failed to parse this correctly, as RoboTux pointed out to me.
Thing is, we as dput authors would be perfectly f
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 06:42:37PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Barry Warsaw writes ("Re: Contributor agreements and copyright assignment
> (was Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems)"):
> > FTR: http://www.canonical.com/contributors
> That allows Canonical to make proprietary forks of the code
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 11:00:35PM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 04.12.2012, 15:07 -0500 schrieb Paul Tagliamonte:
> > On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 02:58:54PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > > On Dec 04, 2012, at 02:29 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > >
> > > >It's currently tied to Pyt
Am Dienstag, den 04.12.2012, 15:07 -0500 schrieb Paul Tagliamonte:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 02:58:54PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > On Dec 04, 2012, at 02:29 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> >
> > >It's currently tied to Python 2.7 (but not to a very high degree, it's
> > >totally backportable).
>
On 2012-12-04 12:42:33 -0800 (-0800), Russ Allbery wrote:
[...]
> The main issue for some of us is not so much the ethical
> objections to these sorts of agreements but rather the fact that
> our employers flatly are not interested in signing anything of the
> sort, ever, with anyone. Much of my fr
On Dec 04, 2012, at 12:42 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>The main issue for some of us is not so much the ethical objections to
>these sorts of agreements but rather the fact that our employers flatly
>are not interested in signing anything of the sort, ever, with anyone.
>Much of my free software work
Bjørn Mork writes:
> IANAL, but I believe you are wrong there. You give them much wider
> rights than this by assigning the copyright to the FSF. The copyright
> owner is free to relicense the work in any way they want.
Have you see the copyright assignment contract that you make with the FSF?
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Aurélien Roux"
* Package name: tapeutape
Version : 0.1.1
Upstream Author : Florent Berthaut
* URL : http://hitmuri.net/index.php/Software/Tapeutape
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C++
Description : a lightweig
Ian Jackson writes:
> Barry Warsaw writes ("Re: Contributor agreements and copyright assignment
> (was Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems)"):
>> FTR: http://www.canonical.com/contributors
>
> That allows Canonical to make proprietary forks of the code (eg, to
> engage in the dual licensing
On Dec 04, 2012, at 06:42 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
>That allows Canonical to make proprietary forks of the code (eg, to
>engage in the dual licensing business model). This is very
>troublesome for me; it's too asymmetric a relationship.
Not to diminish your own concerns, but it doesn't bother me.
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 02:58:54PM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Dec 04, 2012, at 02:29 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>
> >It's currently tied to Python 2.7 (but not to a very high degree, it's
> >totally backportable).
>
> Mmm, Python 2. Would the authors be open to a Python 3 port? :)
>
> -Ba
On Dec 04, 2012, at 02:29 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>It's currently tied to Python 2.7 (but not to a very high degree, it's
>totally backportable).
Mmm, Python 2. Would the authors be open to a Python 3 port? :)
-Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 05:49:43PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> The answer, as it happens, is the very terms of the FSF's copyright
> assignment, which ensures the work remains available under a copyleft
> license. *That* is the gold standard for copyright assignment, by which
> other copyright
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 06:35:49PM +, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > As we recently announced [1], we have been working on a complete
> > re-implementation of dput [2]. As of today, the package is available in
> > Debian Unstable [3] ready for early adoptors.
> >
> [...]
>
> What are
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 06:35:49PM +, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > As we recently announced [1], we have been working on a complete
> > re-implementation of dput [2]. As of today, the package is available in
> > Debian Unstable [3] ready for early adoptors.
> >
> [...]
>
> What are the
Barry Warsaw writes ("Re: Contributor agreements and copyright assignment (was
Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems)"):
> FTR: http://www.canonical.com/contributors
That allows Canonical to make proprietary forks of the code (eg, to
engage in the dual licensing business model). This is very
Hi,
> As we recently announced [1], we have been working on a complete
> re-implementation of dput [2]. As of today, the package is available in
> Debian Unstable [3] ready for early adoptors.
>
[...]
What are the chances of dput-ng becoming available in backports (well, once we
release, backpor
Hello fellow Developers,
As we recently announced [1], we have been working on a complete
re-implementation of dput [2]. As of today, the package is available in
Debian Unstable [3] ready for early adoptors.
We'd like to encourage everyone to test the new look and feel of dput,
and, if you're int
On 04/12/2012 19:38, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 12:16:58 +0100
> Thomas Koch wrote:
>> Please add some details in the description about "Aeolus Image Factory".
>> What
>> is it?
>
> Yes, it's submitted as Bug#694034, "System image generation tool for
> various Virtual
Hi,
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 12:16:58 +0100
Thomas Koch wrote:
> Please add some details in the description about "Aeolus Image Factory". What
> is it?
Yes, it's submitted as Bug#694034, "System image generation tool for
various Virtual Machine environment"
see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr
Hideki Yamane:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Hideki Yamane
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-cl...@lists.debian.org
>
>Package name: aeolus-cli
> Version: 0.7.7
> Upstream Author: Red Hat, Inc.
>
> URL: https://github.com/aeolusproject/
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Hideki Yamane
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-cl...@lists.debian.org
Package name: deltacloud-client
Version: 1.0.5
Upstream Author: 2010-2012 The Apache Software Foundation
URL: http://deltacloud.apache.org/
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Hideki Yamane
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-cl...@lists.debian.org
Package name: aeolus-cli
Version: 0.7.7
Upstream Author: Red Hat, Inc.
URL: https://github.com/aeolusproject/aeolus-cli
License: Apache-
27 matches
Mail list logo
