On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 05:37:15PM -0400, Fabien Ninoles wrote:
> The reason for a seperate directory is for ease of mirroring and CD
> building. It gives us also an easy way to check if a package can be
> on data.
>
> I will really like to see this one at least second. It's an old thread
> that I
Seconded, this seems a good solution.
Quoting Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tue, May 25, 1999 at 10:35:57AM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
> > I changed the description so it does not say it is a mirror anymore:
> >
> > [..]
> >
> > Does that help at all?
>
> Not really, but if enough people really think I'm wrong on this I wo
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 12:47:33AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Having said that, and thought about the packages I maintain, 'jargon'
> clearly fits in the above category, and will be withdrawn until there is
> an appropriate archive.
nah, don't do that. Wait for wichert's proposal when the lo
On 25-May-99, 04:35 (CDT), Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 23 May, 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > I have the same objection to this I had to the anarchist thing: You're
> > trying to package their website. I don't think we should be doing that.
>
> I changed the description so
On 25-May-99, 01:47 (CDT), Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 May, 1999, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > There are other reasons that free software is good (e.g. the ESR
> > utilitarian arguments). Some Debianers might agree with one philosophy,
> > others another. If you're going to
On 24-May-99, 22:06 (CDT), Ron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There are other reasons that free software is good (e.g. the ESR
> > utilitarian arguments). Some Debianers might agree with one philosophy,
> > others another.
>
>
> um.. Debian GNU/Linux
> ^^^
> I'd say that's reason eno
On Tue, May 25, 1999 at 10:35:57AM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
> I changed the description so it does not say it is a mirror anymore:
>
> [..]
>
> Does that help at all?
Not really, but if enough people really think I'm wrong on this I won't
press the issue. I also didn't press the issue with the
> And if you want to you can package the ESR view point and upload it.
Anyone taking bets as to which will be the first to add a depends
on the popularity-contest package ;-)
Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Why should they include the GNU view of free software when there are others
around?
Maybe because we're Debian _GNU_/Linux?
Another thought, here is the current doc-base file:
Document: gnu-philosophy
Title: Philosophy of the GNU Project
Author: Richard M. Stallman, Georg C. F. Greve, Tom Hull, Kragen Sitaker, Loyd
Fueston, Michael Stutz, Bjørn Remseth, and others
Abstract: Ideas about free software, and the reasons
On Sun, 23 May, 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
> I have the same objection to this I had to the anarchist thing: You're
> trying to package their website. I don't think we should be doing that.
I changed the description so it does not say it is a mirror anymore:
new debian package, version 2.0.
s
On Mon, 24 May, 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 1999 at 06:59:47PM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
> > Why does Debian only accept free software? What is so good about free
> > software? It is all explained in this package.
>
> Indeed.
>
> > If your objection remains, I will not uploa
On Mon, 24 May, 1999, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 24-May-99, 12:59 (CDT), Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why does Debian only accept free software? What is so good about free
> > software? It is all explained in this package.
>
> There are other reasons that free software is good (e.
Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I don't like Documentation-only packages if they are not specific to
Debian. It's the 40 MB atromonical dataset in a smaller scale.
> Hmm... perhaps a more catching name like "why-free" would be better?
> No-one's going to read "gnu-philosophy" :-)
I
> > Why does Debian only accept free software? What is so good about free
> > software? It is all explained in this package.
>
> There are other reasons that free software is good (e.g. the ESR
> utilitarian arguments). Some Debianers might agree with one philosophy,
> others another.
um.. Debi
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to:
Jorge Araya (Mailbox or Conference is full.)
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to:
Jorge Araya (Mailbox or Conference is full.)
On Mon, May 24, 1999 at 06:59:47PM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
> Why does Debian only accept free software? What is so good about free
> software? It is all explained in this package.
Indeed.
> If your objection remains, I will not upload the package.
Why?
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian g
On 24-May-99, 12:59 (CDT), Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why does Debian only accept free software? What is so good about free
> software? It is all explained in this package.
There are other reasons that free software is good (e.g. the ESR
utilitarian arguments). Some Debianers might
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to:
Jorge Araya (Mailbox or Conference is full.)
On Sun, 23 May, 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
> I have the same objection to this I had to the anarchist thing: You're
> trying to package their website. I don't think we should be doing that.
>
> Granted I'd rather see this website packaged before one trying to tell me
> all about the good politic
I have the same objection to this I had to the anarchist thing: You're
trying to package their website. I don't think we should be doing that.
Granted I'd rather see this website packaged before one trying to tell me
all about the good political and philosphical things resulting from
anarchy, bu
Hmm... perhaps a more catching name like "why-free" would be better?
No-one's going to read "gnu-philosophy" :-)
Richard Braakman
new debian package, version 2.0.
size 570634 bytes: control archive= 2271 bytes.
534 bytes,22 lines control
4932 bytes,56 lines md5sums
191 bytes, 6 lines * postinst #!/bin/sh
171 bytes, 6 lines * prerm
25 matches
Mail list logo
