On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 03:48:24PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > That's unusual. Is having multiple packages on a single header also
> > valid? eg:
> > Package: glibc, systemd, sysvinit
> > ?
> I think it's cleaner to have one per package tag, but its either that or
> only one line, comma-seper
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 01:42:58PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> Please check if I forgot something obvious or if there is some big error
> in it. Patches/git trees to merge from/... are welcome.
dcut from dput-ng uses $login-$timestamp rather than "EPOCH" per se. Does
this actually matter, or is
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 04:33:04PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> This now means that more and more users end up enabling non-free just
> to be able to get at this firmware, which is a problem for many
> reasons.
> 1. Split up non-free?
> -
> Yes - need to work out details.
(a
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:15:08AM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:06:53PM +0000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> The user interface improvement might be worth it anyhow, but selling
> this as huge security improvement is just wrong, which is all I am
> against.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 12:47:42PM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> > I think my working assumption is "anyone" can register, and it's done
> > automatically. If you want to ensure the URL is owned by the register,
> > you could use a dummy DNS record ("please add
> >extrepo-de684554ae0c3440.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:23:19AM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:12:05PM +0000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I'm not sure if the idea is PPAs can only be added to by DDs/DMs. [...]
> There is a session about Debian PPAs at 2015-08-21 17:00..18:00
> @
(Piling onto this after a dc15 dinner convo referencing it)
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 12:41:45AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 07:27:21PM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:14:21AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
(apologies if the identity of who
e sort of statistical
review of uploads accepted to testing during the freeze (how many RC bug
fixes required more RC bug fixes, how long it took for library transitions
to get in sync, etc) and get some ideas for those things. Otherwise,
nothing much jumped out at me...
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 01:16:19PM +0100, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> Le 19/03/2015 10:11, Enrico Zini a écrit :
> > Hello,
> >
> > the oauth2 part of our single signon system is in need of a team of people
> > to maintain it, and my experience so far has been that nobody seems to
> > understand oa
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Anthony Towns
* Package name: python-beanbag
Version : 1.9.1
Upstream Author : Anthony Towns
* URL : https://pypi.python.org/pypi/beanbag/
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Helper module for
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 09:22:39AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > BTW, it occured to me that it seems like a wart that update-rc.d doesn't
> > respect policy-rc.d -- as it stands, policy-rc.d can prevent a service
> > from (re)starting during
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 02:38:04PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > If deb-systemd-* were to get merged in, it might be worth doing a name
> > change at the same time, I guess. Changing either before jessie doesn'
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:05:13AM +0100, Bj??rn Mork wrote:
> m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> > On Nov 17, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >> > This is what many still (retorically) wonder about: we the systemd
> >> > maintainers did not reject that change,
> >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:10:58AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Having a single tool that does the basic stuff admins and maintainers need
> > independent of init system seems like the right approach to me. "*-rc.
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 03:52:39PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2014, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I assume that RC bug was one blocker from the systemd maintainers'
> > POV, but that bug doesn't seem to have been considered by the
> > technical commit
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 01:43:37PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Can someone of the systemd maintainers please explain why this is being done
> as a separate helper instead of integrating with the tools that are already
> defined in policy and already part of the base system (e.g., invoke-rc.d)?
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 05:11:47PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > I would, for example, have classified the discussions / arguments in the
> > "systemd-sysv | systemd-shim" bug ...
> I was really confused that this needed to go to the TC; from what I
> could tell, it had no downside systems using
Hey Joey,
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 06:12:13PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Please take that message with a pound of salt. I was upset when I wrote
> it, it's probably not accurate, and I've left[1] for reasons that are
> much more broadly structural, and are certianly not the fault of the
> technical
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 04:13:34PM +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 04, 2014 at 07:34:07PM +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> > So, I guess merging both could cross a lot of points of your list and
> > be relatively easily feed into unstable for proper field-testing.
> > (a upload of
provide patch
to generate Patch-Step-Size header, and optionally use rred method to
update patches to make it a bit easier to download stuff
If anyone wants to poke around, please do!
Cheers,
aj
[0] https://lists.debian.org/deity/2009/08/msg00169.html
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/
made such
progress as the new FHS maintainers while we're at it? :)
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns
ure buildd performances
http://merkel.debian.org/~ajt/plots/buildd-2.html
-- architecture up-to-dateness
The box at the bottom right lets you do a rolling average, and you can
click and drag to choose a particular date range to view. I haven't
set it up to automatically update yet.
Cheers,
of the md5sums files...).
(Well, better handling of the md5sums files themselves could be useful
for basic integrity checking too -- a disk/fs error that trashes files
in /var/lib/dpkg/info/ can be inconvenient too)
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:28, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
>> Advantages of doing it when uploading:
>> - provides some sort of double check of what's being uploaded
>> - saves CPU time on users' machines
> - avoids having bad ch
t support for sha1/sha256/crc/... checksums
by just changing one package
- admin has hashes of exactly what was unpacked, no matter the source
- no concerns about bugs in dh_md5sums or similar resulting in bad checksums
Advantages of doing it when uploading:
- provides some sort of double check o
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 05:39:23AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 07:28:58PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> > About freeze timing we think that DebConf should definitely not fall
> > into a freeze
> > We noticed that releases in the first quarter of the year
entage of time on average that each buildd is actually
building something, and idle-buildds is "n-buildds * (1 - buildd-load)".
Release criteria are then something like "buildd-speed >= 50%",
"idle-buildds >= 1".
Cheers,
aj
#!/usr/bin/env python
# Copyright (
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 05:39:23AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> So, http://release.debian.org/squeeze/arch_qualify.html lists kfreebsd-*
> and m68k as not release candidates, and arm, ia64, mips and powerpc as
> "at risk" in addition to alpha and hppa. Only m68k is listed as h
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 07:28:58PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Architectures
> =
> As some of you might have noticed, we added the architectures
> kfreebsd-i386 and kfreebsd-amd64 to testing. [...]
> However, two architectures also have issues we need to bring to your
> attention: We sent
Hello,
There seem to be some issues with the ftp mirror on merkel:
$ pwd
/srv/ftp.debian.org/ftp
$ ls -l dists/sid/Contents-powerpc.diff/ | tail -n2
-rw-rw-r-- 1 archvsync archvsync 2053 Jan 14 13:40 Index
?- ? ? ? ??
dists/sid/Contents-powerpc.diff/200
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 10:10:24PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> But the way you wrote in 4 as "we will make any private discussions
> publically available at the earliest opportunity." is problematic since
> it is 100% disclosure pledge. I suggest something along "we will make
> any private discussio
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 10:03:20AM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 03:02:41PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Using the word "software" as the basis for the divide might be too much:
> I'm not convinced that leaving important parts of Debian un
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 08:45:16PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 12:48:24AM +, Simon Huggins wrote:
> > I wonder how many DDs were ashamed to vote the titled "Reaffirm the
> > social contract" lower than the choices that chose to release.
> I'm not ashamed at all; I joine
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 09:08:04PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Further discussion came sixth, beaten by between 95 votes (option 2),
> and 11 votes (option 6), with Reaffirm the social contract last, defeated
> by further discussion by 109 votes.
Oh, a further thought came to mind. O
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 12:04:43AM +, devo...@vote.debian.org wrote:
> In the following table, tally[row x][col y] represents the votes that
> option x received over option y.
> Option
> 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
> === === === ===
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 10:55:00AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 11:43 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Interesting; Manoj's post isn't in the -vote archives on master. I wonder
why that is?
> > Actually, I think we need a GR on the lines of
> > ,
> > | http
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 08:05:06AM +0300, Guillem Jover wrote:
> As per policy 3.5 I'm bringing this up here. I'd like to add lzma to
> dpkg's Pre-Depends, so that we can use lzma compressed packages after
> lenny w/o having to add an lzma Pre-Depends on each .deb package
> compressed that way.
Hr
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 01:39:40PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> [ /me sets the Reply-To: to debian-cd again... ]
But not Mail-Followup-To:...
> >At a bare minimum:
- installer - downloadable (business card)
- installer+base - downloadable (netinst)
> > - CD - disk 1 dow
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 08:16:55AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 03/17/08 04:47, Philip Charles wrote:
> [snip]
> > worrying about. Even then bluray disc(s) will take up about the same
> > space as a CD set.
>
21GB on CD is 21GB on Bluray. Physical space isn't an issue for us.
Cheers,
aj
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:59:52PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> 2 small CDs per arch (business card, netinst)
> ~30 CDs per arch for a full CD set
> ~4 DVDs per arch for a full DVD set
> (total 353 CDs, 51 DVDs, 426 GB)
Bluray image? Apparently there's been a winner in the format wars,
and w
On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 10:38:44PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 09-Mar-08, 19:30 (CDT), Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I was going to ask on which grounds exactly you were judging the dpkg
> > team's competence (and that of iwj's: have you reviewed the branch
> > yourself? can y
that Guillem is no longer a maintainer.
> > For the record, Ian has been removed from the "dpkg" group on Alioth and
> > we asked for an UNACCEPT of his upload, but I'm not sure it will be done
> > on time as none of the ftpmasters responded yet to my queries on IRC.
>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 01:53:17PM +, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 09:42:17AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum
> wrote:
> > (1) Forbid DDs and people in the NM process waiting for
> > FD/DAM to apply as students.
> What if we do this, and still do not get many new people
> applying? How ab
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 06:23:28PM -0800, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> Would it be possible to only re-order elements that were introduced by
> a variable substitution? That would make the list deterministic without
> changing what the maintainer wrote.
At best you could:
(a) sort substvar
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 11:45:45AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Hence I think we should push for source upload.
Stop pushing and start programming. A technical approach to this would
be implementing something along the lines of
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/07/msg00544.html
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 04:30:09PM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
> > Currently, the packages that are asking for wx2.8 are almost all available
> > and releasable in earlier versions, built against wx2.6. Uploading wx2.8 to
> > unstable implies that it's suitable for apps to build against, which b
RIB_ID=Debian
] DISTRIB_RELEASE=lenny
] DISTRIB_CODENAME=lenny
] DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Debian x.y Testing distribution - Not Released"
Cheers,
aj
#!/usr/bin/env python
# Copyright 2007 Anthony Towns
# GPL v2 or later.
import apt_pkg, sys, os
apt_pkg.init()
def try_write(file):
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 04:21:20PM +0100, Adeodato Sim?? wrote:
> * Anthony Towns [Thu, 27 Dec 2007 17:34:49 +1000]:
> > On Wed, Dec 26, 2007 at 11:53:25PM +0100, Adeodato Sim?? wrote:
> > > *Personally*, I like the idea of Javier Fern??ndez-Sanguino expressed in
> > &g
matching packages are more recent
Remaining packages:
bzr: 0.15-1
...
Cheers,
aj
#!/usr/bin/env python
# Copyright 2007 Anthony Towns
# GPL v2 or later.
import apt_pkg, sys, os
apt_pkg.init()
def get_installed():
vs = {}
i = open("/var/lib/dpkg/status", "r"
On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 02:26:30PM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> 1. Get wx2.4 out of the archive _soon_. There's a list in wiki.d.o about
> the status of the last applications using wx2.4, if I remember right.
> Their maintainers had more than enough time to et them migrated to 2.6
> (or 2.8, if th
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 08:25:05AM +0100, NN_il_Confusionario wrote:
> Question: is there somewhere on the net a script (*) such that:
> * it installs required/essential packages (_all_ of them but _only_
> them) of such a release as a chroot in that directory
You could create a variant for debo
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 11:03:08PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Frankly, I suggest we look at the list of Unix commands as
> specified by the SUS -- which can also be seen at:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unix_programs
> So -- how many of the standard unix commands
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 05:09:36PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:34:10 -0800, Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > I use "time" in benchmarking scripts.
> I do not find the built in time to be a substitute for the good
> old fashioned time command. Observe:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 10:26:11AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > I'm not sure if there's any point to continuing to try to make sure
> > that nothing >= optional conflicts with anything else >= optional.
> Hmm. Can you elaborate on this, please? Is it because it is too
> hard to achi
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 07:42:06AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It also includes, but afaics, probably doesn't need to (anymore):
> > ispell, dictionaries-common, iamerican, ibritish, wamerican
> > m4, texinfo (
Kind of reviving an old thread, but anyway:
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 07:12:35PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> I believe it to be one of the more important bits of a standard Unix
> *desktop* installation - but this just reminds me of the fact that I'm
> quite uncomfortable with keeping a s
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 01:28:08PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> On 3 Dec 2007, at 12:43 pm, Daniel Schepler wrote:
>> Control files of package am-utils: lines which differ (wdiff format)
>>
>> Dep
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 03:38:54PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> There's also --rsyncable which is appears mostly (if not only) on Debian
> and unfortunately can't be figured out from the headers.
> Multipart gzips would also not work even though I haven't yet find any.
Both these are cases wh
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 04:15:44PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> BTW, the next release of pristine-tar will support generating pristine
> gz files too, so will fully support pristine .orig.tar.gz. Regenerating
> pristine gz files from small deltas is quite a lot trickier, and
> currently works for abou
On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 09:46:47AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 01:08:40AM +1000, Anthony Towns a ?crit :
> > For what it's worth, we don't do that. References I'm aware of:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/05/msg00092.html
&
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 11:24:21PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 03:35:15PM -0500, Peter Samuelson a ?crit :
> I fully agree with what you write. Indeed what I support is not to ignore
> the RFC or other similarly non-free, non-programmatic files, but to
> document them in
(-kernel dropped)
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 03:47:43PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:07:43 +0300, Faidon Liambotis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> > Sune Vuorela wrote:
> >> On 2007-09-12, Faidon Liambotis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> You're not checking for copyright v
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 02:07:55PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> What about adding clarifications, what about summarising parts of the RFC?
You don't need a free license to do either of those things, though, which
is part of the reason why...
> It's more about the freedom to fix things or to use thi
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 06:26:45PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> >> The Firefox monoculture is doing a lot of harm to our community.
> > So, I don't know what "monoculture" you're referring to.
> Popcon gives 23000 for iceweasel, 500 for dillo, and 18 for netsurf.
> (Correct me if I'm wrong, b
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 02:49:25PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Sep 2007, Patrick Winnertz wrote:
> > This was no good work which was quicked hacked together.
> I'm sorry, but when I upload a new upstream release of Django, I don't
> check every new file.
> It's all good that you do
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 11:39:42AM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Michael Meskes wrote:
> > I have no idea what Daniel really did on the package.
> I did about 90% of the inital packaging.
Which just left the last 90% of the packaging, I guess.
> Patrick uploaded removed me from changelog in the
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 10:41:10PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> # Our priorities are our users and free software
> I must have misunderstood, I thought this was what Debian was all
> about.
Which is fine, but the problem is there's so many ways of working on
those priorities that nobody can
On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 05:05:28PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> I'd opt for dpkg generating the checksums upon _extracting_ the .deb
> file. [...]
Where's the code for that?
Changing write_filelist_except to update a new .md5 control file ought to
be possible. You'd probably want to add a *ne
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 10:13:38PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 06:54:49AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > diversions are far from being atomic.
> True, but it is persistent across upgrades and doesn't require any
> particular support from the package.
Is it a bug (or a mis
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 06:00:21PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 12:53:03PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > OTOH, specifically using something else than /bin/sh for a fast
> > POSIX-with-the-extensions-Debian-mandates shell (i.e. forget posh, but dash
> > is
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 03:59:13AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jul 29, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So is anything ever valid other than openbsd-inetd | inet-superserver as a
> > dependency? I keep getting confused on the rules around using virtual
> > packages. Would rlinetd |
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 08:25:58AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2007 at 09:28:46PM -0400, Ricky Zhou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Package: wnpp
> > Severity: wishlist
> > Owner: Ricky Zhou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > * Package name: smolt
> > Version : 0.9.8.3
> >
On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 12:02:32AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > People really do use both package priorities and sections still for
> > selecting packages in the package management tools, and it would be great
> > to have them fixed.
> Seconded. I tried once to install all "optional" packages a
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 01:44:04PM -0400, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 02:48:34PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> > Can someone tell me, why ftp.debian.org is lacking behind?
> Apparently it's out of disk :(
This is now fixed. Thanks for the report.
Cheers,
aj
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 02:48:34PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Can someone tell me, why ftp.debian.org is lacking behind?
Apparently it's out of disk :(
(250G for the current archive, 44GB for archived suites, 11G for an old
packages.d.o, and the remaining 15G or so looks like it's used in .~
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:20:40PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> ] > I thought choice-of-venue is non-free by default?
An example of a different MPL 1.1 derived choice-of-venue clause is
firebird2's:
This License shall be governed by California law provisions (except to
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 06:28:53PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:09:07AM +0200, Michael Hanke a ?crit :
> > My question is now: Is it reasonable to provide this rather huge amount
> > of data in a package in the archive?
> many thanks for bringing this crucial question o
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 07:55:18PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 19:30:36 +1000 Anthony Towns wrote:
> > And I mean, I know what a GR is for, why are you telling me? It's
> > still not a *good solution* for deciding these things; it's a last
>
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:58:08PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> IMO it would be worth it if we could split out gigabytes of data from the
> main archive and thus significantly reduce the bandwidth needed for
> mirror syncs. Especially if that data is only used by an extremely small
> subset of user
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 02:09:06AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Why doesn't it matter? If I've been sued because of something I've actually
> done that infringed the license, then surely the DFSG and Debian shouldn't
> be concerned with that (other than the question of whether what I've done is
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:08:31AM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote:
> That's true, as an ideal. In reality, you can't expect every DD or even
> maintainer to subscribe to -legal except when they've got a particular
> problem to discuss.
Sure, but you don't need or want that. All you need is an unbias
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 12:07:52PM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote:
> You could ask Anthony whether you're allowed to publish his reasons on
> -legal. That would do the project a great favor.
You could just ask me directly you know...
] > I thought choice-of-venue is non-free by default?
]
] Via Simo
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 06:28:53PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:09:07AM +0200, Michael Hanke a ?crit :
> > My question is now: Is it reasonable to provide this rather huge amount
> > of data in a package in the archive?
> > An alternative to a dedicated package would be
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 11:08:39PM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote:
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > See, given that as an ftpmaster I'm one of the folks who actually
> > implements the policy on what's accepted into main or not, it's not my
> >
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 08:27:13AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> The troll checklist:
Heh. Free advice: the best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them.
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > The debian-legal checklist:
> > On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 11:28:22AM -0400, Michael Poole wrot
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 04:07:30AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > What I care about is having a reasonable, widely understood definition
> > of free software that meshes with the rest of the free software and open
> > source community, that Debian can use to work out what software we'll
> > distr
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 07:30:36PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Obviously (I hope), I don't consider you to be inexperienced in free
> software development, [...]
To expand on that a bit more: IMHO, Debian is fundamentally about what its
contributors want -- we're focussed on do
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 01:13:44AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> It is a freedom that I have by default; if I accept the CDDL I no longer
> have that freedom[1]. [...]
> [1] Technically, not the right to "choose a venue", but the right to not be
> sued in a venue where I have no legal presence.
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 02:42:24AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 06:49:54PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > If you're claiming "you don't get to exercise your right to argue
> > about jurisdiction" is equivalent to "you must pet a ca
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 12:25:41AM -0700, Walter Landry wrote:
Non-developer, non-maintainer, non-applicant: Check.
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For a choice of venue clause though, it only stops some people from
> > being willing to participate; just as
On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 11:14:16AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > But even so, when you say things like "I'm personally more concerned
> > about licensing than the average developer" and "I [...] expect
> > people who disagree with my analysis to actually engage the analysis
> > with counter argum
The debian-legal checklist:
On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 11:28:22AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
Posted by a non-DD, non-maintainer and non-applicant: Check.
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > [...] And as far as the actual effects go,
> > I'm not sure you're going to be any bette
nment to
extradite you or enforce its rulings for them.
Should someone be willing to do that, and a court is willing to go
through all those steps with a choice of venue clause, what makes you
think they'd not do so in the absence of one?
> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > &g
On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 04:51:40AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 12:25:14PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Additionally, personally I don't think it's unreasonable for people to
> > say "if you use my software in a way that I didn't want you to, I'll sue
> > you in a cou
excluding yourself from
being in a position to define Debian's interpretation of "free software".
(And it doesn't matter what the outcome of that vote had been -- including
if it had been "the GFDL is a free license even with invariant section")
For reference, ftpma
On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 11:10:19AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 03:40:36PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> >> I do *not* agree that the CDDL meets the DFSG, especially when a choice
> >> of venue is in place.
> &
debian-devel re-added.
On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 03:40:36PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 21:50:15 +1000 Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 10:54:36AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > and to the best of my knowledge, works licensed solely under t
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 10:54:36AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> and to the best of my knowledge, works licensed solely under the CDDL
> have never been accepted in main.[1]
star | 1.5a57-1 | oldstable | source, alpha, arm, [...]
star | 1.5a67-1 | stable | source, alpha, amd64, [...]
http://packa
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:53:43PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> On ti, 2007-05-22 at 13:30 +0200, Sam Hocevar wrote:
> > 1. The GPLv3: the latest draft did not raise major objections from
> > -legal and despite its concerns with the strategies developed in some
> > sections, Debian does con
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 04:57:46PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> More than a month ago I filed a bug report
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=418956
Sorry about that, fixed now.
(The daily regeneration of the Release files wasn't working because
the dak script wasn't noticin
1 - 100 of 795 matches
Mail list logo
