On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 12:32:08PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> I for one appreciate this sort of early warning. It's much easier to
> deal with failures like this promptly before they become a serious
> problem, rather than having to disentangle things later when several
> different failures have
Hi. I just wanted to say thank you to all the people who have
contributed to the fact that apt now verifies packages with Sequoia
(sqv) by default.
I know I will have missed some people, hence the CC to -devel and to
the Debian Rust team. And thanks of course are also due to all the
upstream
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
he constitution, Steve could have made it
> more difficult for other people to revise the wording of their ballot
> options.
> Those are the sorts of abuses I'm talking about.
> None of those happened in this election as far as I am aware.
Ah in that case I completely misunderstood
> "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
>> o
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 exc
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
Hi Kurt
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 project secretary and it seems th
I just wanted to say thank you again for getting this working. I know
I have been sending a lot of messages about how things can be
improved. That doesn't really reflect how good a change this has
been.
Now, when I have a package with a good test suite, development speed
is very substantially in
me to the conclusion
that this must be a bot (wondering how the bot would be even able to
create patches). So its really a human beeing. Than thanks for all the
very helpful QA work.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
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
I just wanted to say how impressed I am with the quick response from
ftpmaster at the moment. Particularly, the 19.5h turnaround for my
most recent NEW package, which I uploaded on Thursday - more in hope
than in expectation.
Regards,
Ian.
--
Ian JacksonThese opinions are my own.
If I emai
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 03:06:17PM +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> Hi Tomas,
>
> Great you like it! Many people are busy working on smoothing the edges
> uncovered by all the inflowing bugreports, so the occasional "thanks!"
> is a nice boost to troop morale. :)
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 03:06:17PM +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> Hi Tomas,
>
> Great you like it! Many people are busy working on smoothing the edges
> uncovered by all the inflowing bugreports, so the occasional "thanks!"
> is a nice boost to troop morale. :)
I
Matthias Urlichs writes:
> Hi,
>
> Philip Hands:
>> It seems to me that we could:
>>
>> Make systemd link runlevel 2 to graphical.target, and 3,4 & 5 to
>> multi-user.target, or perhaps in an attempt to be slightly less
>> confusing to outsiders, how about:
>> 2 & 5 --> graphical
>>
Hi,
Philip Hands:
> It seems to me that we could:
>
> Make systemd link runlevel 2 to graphical.target, and 3,4 & 5 to
> multi-user.target, or perhaps in an attempt to be slightly less
> confusing to outsiders, how about:
> 2 & 5 --> graphical
> 3 & 4 --> multi-user
>
Or we could
Felipe Sateler writes:
...
> This is indeed unfortunate. Because runlevel[234] are links to
> multi-user.target it means that distinctions between those runlevels are
> not preserved. It also means that the ability to differentiate between
> graphical.target and multi-user.target is almost lost
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 11:36:20 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 08:34:46 +0100, Matthias Urlichs
> wrote:
>>Marc Haber:
>>> It's learning and understanding more than just a few bizarre new
>>> concepts.
>>>
>>I learned. I (think I) understand. But I do not think these fancy new
>>con
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 08:34:46 +0100, Matthias Urlichs
wrote:
>Marc Haber:
>> It's learning and understanding more than just a few bizarre new concepts.
>>
>I learned. I (think I) understand. But I do not think these fancy new
>concepts are bizarre at all. If anything, they make my life way easier.
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 09:09:19 +0100, Matthias Urlichs
wrote:
>Marc Haber:
>> Which significantly changes things in Jessie since the majory of
>> services is still started via the old rcX.d mechanism, and thus
>> starting to runlevels behaves completely different from what users
>> expect.
>>
>Well
Hi,
Marc Haber:
> Which significantly changes things in Jessie since the majory of
> services is still started via the old rcX.d mechanism, and thus
> starting to runlevels behaves completely different from what users
> expect.
>
Well, I wouldn't expect runlevel 2 to start a graphical desktop eit
Hi,
Marc Haber:
> It's learning and understanding more than just a few bizarre new concepts.
>
I learned. I (think I) understand. But I do not think these fancy new
concepts are bizarre at all. If anything, they make my life way easier.
If anything, IMHO using words like "bizarre" isn't exactly
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014 22:33:08 +0100, Ansgar Burchardt
wrote:
>Marc Haber writes:
>> A few hours of reasearch later (which could have been a few minutes if
>> just the community would have been a bit more helpful) it turned out
>> they were right: We start kdm via an init script and sysvrc emulatio
Le vendredi 28 novembre 2014, 22:25:28 Marc Haber a écrit :
> We start kdm via an init script and sysvrc emulation,
> and this does actually break the distinction between multi-user.target
> and graphical.target.
Hi,
Here is a native kdm service I'v copied from an other distro months ago;
and use
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014 20:55:42 +0100, Philipp Kern
wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 07:08:09PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
>> And this facing a mostly hostile upstream and a Fedora-Centric
>> community.
>
>I have observed a mostly hostile Debian community in recent months. I'm not
>sure if this jab at F
Hi,
Marc Haber writes:
> A few hours of reasearch later (which could have been a few minutes if
> just the community would have been a bit more helpful) it turned out
> they were right: We start kdm via an init script and sysvrc emulation,
> and this does actually break the distinction between mu
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 07:08:09PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> And this facing a mostly hostile upstream and a Fedora-Centric
> community.
I have observed a mostly hostile Debian community in recent months. I'm not
sure if this jab at Fedora is particularly warranted.
Kind regards
Philipp Kern
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014 09:30:01 +0100, Matthias Urlichs
wrote:
>Marc Haber:
>> Updating of such systems has always been a pain, but this time it's
>> going to be a gazillion times more painful.
>>
>Why? (Seriously.)
Because this time fixing those things is more than just minor changes
in some init
Hi,
Marc Haber:
> Updating of such systems has always been a pain, but this time it's
> going to be a gazillion times more painful.
>
Why? (Seriously.)
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact l
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 23:50:08 +0800, Thomas Goirand
wrote:
>On 11/27/2014 09:22 PM, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
>> Yesterday I've upgraded my laptop with quite massive foreign package
>> sources and installations (qgis packages, backports, stuff from ubuntu
>> PPAs, nodejs, a dozen packages from jessie e
On Jo, 27 nov 14, 15:06:17, David Kalnischkies wrote:
>
> It's also not the worst idea to remove stuff from third party
> repositories before upgrading and only install them again after the
> upgrade. This way you can sure that they aren't interfering (something
> which can't be prevented and just
On 11/27/2014 09:22 PM, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
> Yesterday I've upgraded my laptop with quite massive foreign package
> sources and installations (qgis packages, backports, stuff from ubuntu
> PPAs, nodejs, a dozen packages from jessie etc.) from wheezy to jessie.
That's probably why you had issues
Hi Tomas,
Great you like it! Many people are busy working on smoothing the edges
uncovered by all the inflowing bugreports, so the occasional "thanks!"
is a nice boost to troop morale. :)
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 02:22:14PM +0100, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
> Allthough apt-get dist-upgra
Hello list,
I hope it's appropriate here, I just wanted to say *thanks to
everybody*, in particular the low level package and infrastructure
maintainers for the excellent work they've done.
Yesterday I've upgraded my laptop with quite massive foreign package
sources and inst
I think all have been said, so I will just join this with +1.
Cheers,
Ondrej
On Sun, Nov 9, 2014, at 02:08, Russ Allbery wrote:
> zlatan writes:
>
> > In advance sorry for all spelling mistake that I will write as I am
> > writing from my phone and I am not a native English speaker.
>
> [...]
Hi Joey,
Am 2014-11-07 22:04, schrieb Joey Hess:
It's become abundantly clear that this is no longer the project I
originally joined in 1996. We've made some good things, and I wish
everyone well, but I'm out.
Shocking.
Thanks for all the great stuff you did and do, from a
On Friday 07 November 2014 17:04:10 Joey Hess wrote:
> It's become abundantly clear that this is no longer the project I
> originally joined in 1996. We've made some good things, and I wish
> everyone well, but I'm out.
I'm very sorry to read this. We'll miss you.
All the best
--
https://githu
Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> So you still could (and perhaps should[0]) reconsider not to leave
> Debian.
> Guess you've read the lists and saw how many people were emotionally
> hit and upset about this.
Joey, I beg you too. Please reconsider.
Still, if it's not fun anymore by all means run
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
Hi Faidon,
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 11:46:57AM +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
>
> Extremely sad to read this, Joey.
+1
I personally feel like loosing a friend. If I imagine myself to leave
Debian I would leave a major part of my life and I guess its similar for
Joey and that the decision was ha
On Sun, 2014-11-09 at 22:38 +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> I can completely understand why we (and that includes me) want systemd
> as a default: it gives the best possible integration of desktop
> components possible.
I even think it's best on a server (that means, if it was used as it
could be)..
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Joey Hess wrote:
> It's become abundantly clear that this is no longer the project I
> originally joined in 1996. We've made some good things, and I wish
> everyone well, but I'm out.
see shy jo :(
Richard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@list
On Sun, 2014-11-09 at 18:12 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> I've left[1]
+
>Almost.
So you still could (and perhaps should[0]) reconsider not to leave
Debian.
Guess you've read the lists and saw how many people were emotionally hit
and upset about this.
(well I think it's worth a try ^^)
Cheers,
Ch
Michael Gilbert wrote:
> How can you possibly think no more need said? You are one of four
> complicit in the act that finally pushed Joey over the edge [0].
>
> [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/11/msg00045.html
Please take that message with a pound of salt. I was upset when I wrote
2014-11-10 0:38 GMT+03:00 Simon Richter :
> automake
With autotools one can always use plain shell code in configure.ac and
plain make in Makefile.am ;-)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On 09.11.2014 04:57, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> In the end it's quite easy: sysvinit has many deficiencies ans
> missing feature, systemd is superior in all places.
- From your perspective.
I can completely understand why we (and that in
On 2014-11-09 18:19, Adam Borowski wrote:
And since changing the init system on
existing installations is an important _technical_ problem, it is in
scope
for the CTTE.
Where does the constitution make "important technical problems" in scope
for the tech committee? (Not being awkward, but th
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 12:54:39PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Ralf Jung wrote:
> > I read Joey's message over and over without getting any more clues. He
> > said the CTTE has "Decided it should make a decision", which it seems to
> > me it did not. So I probab
On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Ralf Jung wrote:
> I read Joey's message over and over without getting any more clues. He
> said the CTTE has "Decided it should make a decision", which it seems to
> me it did not. So I probably misunderstood something more fundamental here.
Read all of #762194 ve
Hi,
On 09/11/14 07:28, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
>> On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 23:30 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>>> No accusation, just a statement of fact. Four ctte members were
>>> complicit in the vote [0]
>>
>> Well maybe I read t
Le samedi 08 novembre 2014 à 23:30 -0500, Michael Gilbert a écrit :
> No, the fire is not systemd, it is the politicization of the project
> via ctte and GR rather than patient evolution of the best technical
> solution.
You are definitely right. However, I think we would all appreciate if
you co
On 11/08/2014 at 10:57 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> In the end it's quite easy: sysvinit has many deficiencies ans
> missing feature, systemd is superior in all places.
On 11/09/2014 at 12:01 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> All of these systems were capable of booting a Linux,...
Sad news. I wish you all the best for your future endeavours. I hope
to cross paths with you from time to time (maybe I should tidy up my
half finished ikiwiki patches!)
The coincidental timing of Colin leaving the tech-ctte did make me
wonder how different things would be if we could have coerced
On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 23:30 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>> No accusation, just a statement of fact. Four ctte members were
>> complicit in the vote [0]
>
> Well maybe I read that ruling wrong, but didn't it more or less say
> "we
On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 23:30 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> No accusation, just a statement of fact. Four ctte members were
> complicit in the vote [0]
Well maybe I read that ruling wrong, but didn't it more or less say
"we're not deciding anything right now"?
And even if that decision would be
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 22:32 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>> You are one of four
>> complicit in the act that finally pushed Joey over the edge [0].
>
> Don't you think it goes a bit far to personally accusing some people of
> this?
On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 22:32 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> You are one of four
> complicit in the act that finally pushed Joey over the edge [0].
Don't you think it goes a bit far to personally accusing some people of
this?
I guess Joey was long enough in the business to have known how to deal
wi
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> zlatan writes:
>
>> In advance sorry for all spelling mistake that I will write as I am
>> writing from my phone and I am not a native English speaker.
>
> [...]
>
> And yet, I don't see how it could have been said better. Thank you so
> much f
zlatan writes:
> In advance sorry for all spelling mistake that I will write as I am
> writing from my phone and I am not a native English speaker.
[...]
And yet, I don't see how it could have been said better. Thank you so
much for putting this into words.
> I just want the warm community fe
1 - 100 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
