Re: ITP: debian-backports-keyring -- GnuPG archive key of the?backports.org repository

2008-06-23 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El domingo, 22 de junio de 2008 a las 12:54:09 -0600, Wesley J. Landaker escribía: > Actually, how are debian-keyring and debian-archive-keyring free-software, > anyway? Do I get source code for the all GPG keys they contain? > The /usr/share/doc/debian-keyring/copyright even says "The keys in

Re: db.debian.org (and related infrastructure) updates

2006-12-31 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El sábado, 30 de diciembre de 2006 a las 15:42:33 +, Nicolas Boullis escribía: > > - the birthDate field isn't currently available via the mail daemon, > >this will be fixed soon. > What about gender? How is it specified? > with a ldapsearch, I can find 1, 2 and 9... It appears to be 1

Re: Will IceWeasel be based on a fork or on vanilla FireFox?

2006-10-16 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El lunes, 16 de octubre de 2006 a las 09:27:32 +0200, Jacobo Tarrio escribía: > Plus, one could say that as someone in Debian came up with the name, then we > have priority over it. > Hey, we can register it as a trade mark! Before anyone gets the bright idea of getting all worked

Re: Will IceWeasel be based on a fork or on vanilla FireFox?

2006-10-16 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El lunes, 16 de octubre de 2006 a las 00:22:53 +0200, Lech Karol Paw?aszek escribía: > > The fact that GNU chose the name "Iceweasel" for their own fork of Firefox > > is extremely unfortunate :-( > Why it is unfortunate? Mozilla Corporation doesn't want (Debian) to use > firefox name without t

Re: Will IceWeasel be based on a fork or on vanilla FireFox?

2006-10-15 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El domingo, 15 de octubre de 2006 a las 22:06:21 +0200, Bastian Venthur escribía: > I've read on several blogs that IceWeasel will be based on a fork of > FireFox and not just on vanilla FireFox. Is this true and if yes, why? AIUI, it will be vanilla Firefox minus logo, minus "Firefox" name, pl

Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code

2006-07-03 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El lunes, 3 de julio de 2006 a las 10:06:56 +0200, Marco d'Itri escribía: > It's this attitude of "DFSG is not restrictive enough, let's invent a > few new restrictions which we like" that is screwing Debian (and our > users). You've got it backwards. -- Jacobo Tarrío | http://jaco

Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code

2006-07-03 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El lunes, 3 de julio de 2006 a las 09:41:18 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson escribía: > > I'd say that the freedom to use the program in any way I see fit is a > > necessary freedom. > Sorry, but the criteria for inclusion in main is the DFSG, not whatever > ideas people might have of necessary fre

Re: ITP: openwatcom -- C/C++ compiler and IDE that produce efficient, portable code

2006-07-03 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El lunes, 3 de julio de 2006 a las 01:36:12 +0100, Matthew Garrett escribía: > Ok, but it still needs to be modified. Are you suggesting that the > freedom to produce a binary that can't be recompiled by anyone else is a > necessary freedom? I'd say that the freedom to use the program in any

Re: Bug#374373: ITP: googleearth-package -- utility for automatically building a Google Earth Debian package

2006-06-18 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El domingo, 18 de junio de 2006 a las 22:03:32 -0500, Ron Johnson escribía: > When I tried to install it as root (using "su -" from an xterm > window), it complained about not being able to find DISPLAY. Unlike > Sun Java & Macromedia Flash, it uses a GUI installer. I've found "sux" works beaut

Re: GFDL question

2006-03-15 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El miércoles, 15 de marzo de 2006 a las 00:14:07 +0100, Henning Makholm escribía: > The above sentence from Jacobo Tarrio seems to use "not distributable" > in sense (b). Since this is not in fact -legal, I assume that we all > actually agree and that JT is simply unfamilia

Re: GFDL question

2006-03-14 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
El martes, 14 de marzo de 2006 a las 08:27:25 +0100, Norbert Preining escribía: > Ok, there are no invariant sections, but there is (a short) front and > back cover text. > How do we proceed with these documents? From the text of the GR itself: This means that works that don't include any Invar

Re: All GPL'ed programs have to go to non-free

2005-04-15 Thread Jacobo Tarrio
> > Adrian, you're deliberately wasting the project's time with a very old, > > eternity-since-debunked "argument". That's known as "trolling". Unless > > you have something of value to say, go away. > If you call me a "troll", please tell me where this is documented. http://lists.debian.org/deb