Steve Langasek dijo [Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 01:53:02PM -0700]:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:25:50PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 12:31:51PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > > IMHO, it's better to have a vote quickly on a limited set of GR options,
> > > with the possibilit
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:25:50PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 12:31:51PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > IMHO, it's better to have a vote quickly on a limited set of GR options,
> > with the possibility of a second GR if there is sufficient dissatisfaction
> > with the fi
Thomas Goirand writes:
> I have to say I'm a bit disappointed to read some wants to change the
> voting system because of what happened during this GR. Yes, the voting
> system should be improved if it is possible to do so. But this GR
> shouldn't be the main reason/motivation.
There are a few d
Wouter Verhelst writes:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 01:04:21PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> * A formal amendment has to be sponsored like a new GR before it can be
>> accepted, but the original proposer of a GR can make their own amendment
>> without having it be sponsored. These two rules ma
Simon Richter writes:
> A core component of the operating system we ship is so complex that it
> needs to be maintained by full-time employees. This has effectively given
> the corporation employing these people veto power over our technical
> decisions, because even though the software they ship i
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:45:29PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Debian is a political project that promotes the autonomy of users vis-a-vis
> > large organizations such as corporations and governments. It does this by
> > promoting the creation of free software, and by fostering a community
On 2021-04-20 12:44, Adrian Bunk wrote:
A single person being able to block consensus of basically everyone
else
feels like opening up the process to unconstructive behavior.
A single person whom we trust to upload anything to our archive.[1]
If the person thinks there is something left that
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:58:51AM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 4) It seems like there is an emerging consensus that we want either all
> votes secret or to be able to have secret non-DPL votes.
I dispute this statement. Some people said that.
I disagree that voting secrecy is (sensibly) possible.
* Wouter Verhelst [2021-04-20 13:50]:
Not sure whether you consider this an issue, but I don't see that as a
problem. There is a difference between "we can't reach an agreement and
therefore decide on a no-outcome vote" (which the default option is),
and "we have considered all the options and d
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 01:04:21PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jonathan Carter writes:
>
> > I think that framing the problems and noting them while the last GR is
> > still fresh in our collective memories will be really useful. I don't
> > think anyone should feel too much pressure right now t
Hi Eduard,
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 08:49:56PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > Make no mistake, the quest to have "apolitical" free software is deeply
> > political in itself: the process that decides which group can establish
> Sorry, by your definition there is no way to escape from political
>
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 11:59:31AM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2021-04-20 10:59, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > I would suggest to replace the option of shortening the discussion
> > period with the possibility of early calling for a vote after a week
> > that can be vetoed by any developer within 24 h
Philipp Kern writes:
> On 2021-04-20 10:59, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> I would suggest to replace the option of shortening the discussion
>> period with the possibility of early calling for a vote after a week
>> that can be vetoed by any developer within 24 hours. This would ensure
>> that shorter dis
On 2021-04-20 10:59, Adrian Bunk wrote:
I would suggest to replace the option of shortening the discussion
period with the possibility of early calling for a vote after a week
that can be vetoed by any developer within 24 hours. This would ensure
that shorter discussion periods would only happen
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 01:04:21PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>...
> * The length of the discussion period is ill-defined in multiple ways,
> which has repeatedly caused conflicts. It only resets on accepted
> amendments but not new ballot options, which makes little logical sense
> and cons
On 4/20/21 12:10 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Instead, some people viewed this as an election about how neutral Debian
> should be. Some people viewed it as a discussion of how much we should
> support rms.
> Some people focused on what we should say about rms.
> And that's okay.
> We'll never entirel
On 2021/04/20 00:10, Sam Hartman wrote:
> The sorts of abuses I was talking about have to do with powers of the
> original proposer to muck with the process.
> Steve could have dragged the process out as long as he wished by
> accepting amendments.
> Under a strict reading of the constitution, Stev
> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Carter writes:
Jonathan> On 2021/04/19 20:18, Daniel Leidert wrote:
>> The vote was actually two votes:
>>
>> a) Should Debian respond publicly as a project? (the "if) b) How
>> should such a response read? (the "how")
Jonathan> I agree with
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 12:31:51PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>...
> IMHO, it's better to have a vote quickly on a limited set of GR options,
> with the possibility of a second GR if there is sufficient dissatisfaction
> with the first GR outcome, than to have community energy spent endlessly on
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 06:37:01PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Simon,
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 04:56:34PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> > Is it really still an open question whether Debian is a political
> > project that has opinions on non-technical topics like the board of the
> > FS
Jonathan Carter writes:
> I think that framing the problems and noting them while the last GR is
> still fresh in our collective memories will be really useful. I don't
> think anyone should feel too much pressure right now to come up with
> solutions, and I'd urge any group of people who are bra
Hi Russ
On 2021/04/19 21:36, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm helping hash out some ideas in private only because framing the
> problem and brainstorming possible solutions requires a ton of back and
> forth...
I think that framing the problems and noting them while the last GR is
still fresh in our col
Quoting Jonathan Carter (2021-04-19 20:37:32)
> On 2021/04/19 20:18, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> > The vote was actually two votes:
> >
> > a) Should Debian respond publicly as a project? (the "if)
> > b) How should such a response read? (the "how")
>
> I agree with you, I've said something similar b
Wouter Verhelst writes:
> Our current processes work best, I believe, if proposals are written in
> the open, so that if people disagree with the proposed texts, they can
> start working on their amendment right away, which is much more
> difficult to do under the time pressure of a GR procedure.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:58:51AM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 1) The person who introduces a GR is treated differently than anyone who
> introduces an amendment in ways that are odd, and are subject to
> strategic abuse.
This asymmetry guards against a GR discussion being allowed to continue
inde
Hallo,
* Simon Richter [Mon, Apr 19 2021, 06:37:01PM]:
> Make no mistake, the quest to have "apolitical" free software is deeply
> political in itself: the process that decides which group can establish
Catch 22?
Sorry, by your definition there is no way to escape from political
discussions. No
On 2021/04/19 20:18, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> The vote was actually two votes:
>
> a) Should Debian respond publicly as a project? (the "if)
> b) How should such a response read? (the "how")
I agree with you, I've said something similar before, although instead
of saying it was two votes, I'd rath
Hi Sam,
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:58:51AM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Certainly in the systemd process there were a number of short comings
> that came to light that are worth improving:
>
> 1) The person who introduces a GR is treated differently than anyone who
> introduces an amendment in way
Am Montag, dem 19.04.2021 um 11:30 +0800 schrieb Benda Xu:
[..]
> The winning option "Debian will not issue a public statement on this
> issue" implies that the majority of DDs is not interested in such
> non-technical affairs.
That's neither what the option said nor was intended for. The vote wa
Am Sonntag, dem 18.04.2021 um 14:04 +0200 schrieb Jonathan Carter:
[..]
> While this vote caught a lot of heat, essentially it's quite a trivial
> vote.
I think this is wrong. And here is why:
> Ultimately it had become a question of if and how we should
> respond to an external situation.
The
> "Theodore" == Theodore Ts'o writes:
Theodore> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 02:05:20PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:30:48AM +0800, Benda Xu wrote:
>> > The winning option "Debian will not issue a public statement on
>> this > issue" implies that the
Hi,
On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 04:56:34PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Is it really still an open question whether Debian is a political
> project that has opinions on non-technical topics like the board of the
> FSF or the legal status of Taiwan, Palestine and Kosovo, or whether
> Debian is a techni
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 02:05:20PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:30:48AM +0800, Benda Xu wrote:
> > The winning option "Debian will not issue a public statement on this
> > issue" implies that the majority of DDs is not interested in such
> > non-technical affairs.
>
Le lundi 19 avril 2021 à 14:05 +0100, Jonathan Dowland a écrit :
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:30:48AM +0800, Benda Xu wrote:
> > The winning option "Debian will not issue a public statement on
> > this
> > issue" implies that the majority of DDs is not interested in such
> > non-technical affairs.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:30:48AM +0800, Benda Xu wrote:
> The winning option "Debian will not issue a public statement on this
> issue" implies that the majority of DDs is not interested in such
> non-technical affairs.
The vote in fact shows the opposite. That interpretation of the result
woul
On 2021-04-19 02:46, Brian Thompson wrote:
Is it really still an open question whether Debian is a political
project that has opinions on non-technical topics like the board of
the
FSF or the legal status of Taiwan, Palestine and Kosovo, or whether
Debian is a technical project where peo
On 2021-04-19 08:57, Jonathan Carter wrote:
That's more than just a big assumption, I'd go as far to say that it's
a
big leap to assume that from that option. Additionally, you're assuming
that that attempts to fix the problems in our voting system would
somehow make us more political? How do
Hi Benda
On 2021/04/19 05:30, Benda Xu wrote:
> I would like to congratulate you for becoming our next DPL.
Thanks!
>> However, I don't think we're quite in a position to pat ourselves on
>> the back here. This vote has once again highlighted some problems in
>> our methods for making decisions.
Hi,
> Benda Xu 於 2021年4月19日 11:40 寫道：
>
> The winning option "Debian will not issue a public statement on this
> issue" implies that the majority of DDs is not interested in such
> non-technical affairs. Such a working group will distract us from
> achieving technical excellence.
>
Most of th
Hi Jonathan,
Jonathan Carter writes:
> On 2021/04/18 13:20, Debian Project Secretary - Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>> The details of the results are available at:
>> https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_002
>
> Thanks for all your work on this vote, I believe that you made excellent
> decisions as proje
all day, every day. The last thing people want to do is contribute to a project in their free time that does the same thing. -Brian Thompson Best regards, Brian Thompson From: Donald NorwoodSent: Sunday, April 18, 2021 5:54 PMTo: Adrian Bunk; debian-devel@lists.debian.orgSubject: Re: Thanks and De
On 4/18/21 9:56 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Is it really still an open question whether Debian is a political
> project that has opinions on non-technical topics like the board of the
> FSF or the legal status of Taiwan, Palestine and Kosovo, or whether
> Debian is a technical project where people of
On Sun, 2021-04-18 at 14:04 +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>
> However, I don't think we're quite in a position to pat ourselves on the
> back here. This vote has once again highlighted some problems in our
> methods for making decisions. I think that we should set up a working
> group to specifica
On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 02:04:38PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>...
> While this vote caught a lot of heat, essentially it's quite a trivial
> vote. Ultimately it had become a question of if and how we should
> respond to an external situation. I think that as Debian grows, as the
> free software
On 14534 March 1977, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> If everybody agrees that
>> - new versions of packages shall be only uploaded to experimental
>> - uploads to testing will only be done on request of the RT or with
>> really new packages
>> - everything else can be rejected
>> processing would b
Thorsten Alteholz writes ("Re: Thanks to ftpmasters for being so responsive"):
> On Mon, 26 Dec 2016, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > This was problematic for me. (upstream) Development doesn't stop when
> > then next stable freeze.
>
> If everybody agrees that
>
Hi Thomas and Ian,
thanks a lot for your kind words.
On Mon, 26 Dec 2016, Thomas Goirand wrote:
However, after the deep freeze, we saw the queue getting bigger and
bigger. The graph for Jessie shows up to 600+ packages in the queue.
For good reasons the Release Team does not want to have pac
Hi,
Am Freitag, den 27.06.2014, 15:45 +0200 schrieb Sven Bartscher:
> I recently started contributing to debian.
> Before that, most of my writing with people I don't know personally
> through the internet was on Stack Exchange.
> On Stack Exchange, messages that only consist of thanking people or
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 03:41:50PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 15:45:21 +0200
> Sven Bartscher wrote:
>
> > Greetings everyone,
> >
> > I recently started contributing to debian.
> > Before that, most of my writing with people I don't know personally
> > through the interne
On Vi, 27 iun 14, 15:45:21, Sven Bartscher wrote:
> Greetings everyone,
>
> I recently started contributing to debian.
> Before that, most of my writing with people I don't know personally
> through the internet was on Stack Exchange.
> On Stack Exchange, messages that only consist of thanking peo
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014, Sven Bartscher wrote:
> This in mind I'm very unsure if I should write messages like that to
> someone or if I should avoid them (to not annoy anyone with them), on
> Debian mailing lists or bug reports.
I think it's nice to hear and give appreciation; doing so privately is
al
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 15:45:21 +0200
Sven Bartscher wrote:
> Greetings everyone,
>
> I recently started contributing to debian.
> Before that, most of my writing with people I don't know personally
> through the internet was on Stack Exchange.
> On Stack Exchange, messages that only consist of tha
Your message was filtered by my personal ANTISPAM filter
and was classified as SPAM, and therefore DIRECTLY TRASHED.
If you think this was done by mistake, please resend your
message, specifying "thru spam" as subject.
Messages with zip files attached are cl
On Thursday 26 October 2006 16:42, Ben Finney wrote:
> It's great to give positive feedback, and even better that you've done
> so in public. I'd call it morale-boosting, certainly not unproductive.
I guess some of us just forget how great Debian is or get blinded by the
vision we have that Debia
Eike Nicklas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not sure where to post this email, so I am sending it to this
> list. It is totally unproductive, but still I'd like to send it :-)
Some businesses have a little sign that says: "If you don't like our
service, please tell us; if you do like our serv
Re: Eike Nicklas 2006-10-26 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So I think it is about time to send a big THANK YOU to ALL of you who
> created this great distribution. Debian was the first distribution that
> persuaded me of the advantages of linux and of free software and by now,
> it has been my favourite ope
On 9/3/06, David Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm writing this mail to you the developers to say thanks for the work
you put into Debian. I am really impressed at how polished etch as a
desktop OS is. Apart from the few odd things (mostly because I'm on
64bit and its still testing) its reall
David Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm writing this mail to you the developers to say thanks for the work
> you put into Debian. I am really impressed at how polished etch as a
> desktop OS is.
Thanks for taking the time to write and post this. It's refreshing to
know that problems are no
58 matches
Mail list logo
