On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 11:51:18AM -0300, Chris Lamb wrote:
> I wish to posit the existence of a third group who are not partipating
> in this discussion.
> This group are simply too exhausted and bored of making the same
> refutations in these debates and have long given up trying. Indeed,
> the
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 01:39:29PM +0100, Iain R. Learmonth wrote:
> [Forwarding to d-d-a on behalf of Iain since he can not sign as DD]
> In Debian GNU/linux they NEVER discussed to port other packages, infact in
> different situations i discuss this on debian-hamradio and on #fsf where
> they sa
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 09:35:19PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 06:09:25PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The usual reasoning for explicitly enumerating things is the thing
> > Solveig mentioned about people being (or professing to be) too inept to
&
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 08:43:06PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 02:31:54AM +, Solveig wrote:
> > 2. "Complaints should be made (in private) to the administrators of the
> > forum in question. To find contact information for these administrators,
> > please see [the p
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 09:25:37AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> In addition, a list of "do not"s will make people assume that the
> project is in a worse state than it actually is. To paraphrase one
> participant of the CoC BoF during debconf, when the draft CoC was still
> somewhat negative: "
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 04:40:58PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 12-03-27 at 03:45pm, Francesca Ciceri wrote:
> > Yes, I agree on accuracy. But please, note that "neurotype" - even if
> > it hasn't scientific recognition as concept - is the way some people
> > define themselves. And we mus
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 04:02:12PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 02:13:35PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>> In order to truly deliver on this we'd need the entire distro to be
>> converted to DEP5 format but elsewhere in the thread it was stated th
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 05:10:11PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Craig Small wrote:
> > What are these benefits?
> The major important bits are that people who are basing distributions
> on Debian or are using Debian in the enterprise or embedded
> environments can more easil
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 12:26:18AM +, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> broo...@sirena.org.uk wrote:
> >The trouble with an approach like that is that it doesn't provide a
> >clear route to dealing with situations where the maintainer is
> >occasionally active but not managing to keep up with things well
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 09:59:24PM +0100, Leo costela Antunes wrote:
> What about adding some informal rule like this to dev-ref (or wherever):
> after n unacknowledged NMUs the package may be taken over without it
> being considered a "hostile takeover", more like "updating to reflect
> the de-fa
On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 02:49:37PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 02:02:59PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> > I am failing to accept that vendors need to use those very specific
> > things in their software. just like I doubt that people need IE-HTML
> > to make their si
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 11:49:09AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > If you prefer to be automatically notified about all changes in Ubuntu, I
> > believe the PTS gives you an option to do this by subscribing to the
> > 'derivatives' keyword. For my p
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 04:13:03PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> I rarely hear anything positive from Ubuntu, except that more and more people
> who are active in Ubuntu realized that it is much better to do things in
> Debian
> directly.
IME the quality of interaction from Ubuntu is very variab
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 06:40:41AM -0300, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw)
wrote:
> On 30-07-2009 07:52, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 09:19:51AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> The new simplified swirl looks cleaner, and it would be nice to move
> >
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 09:19:51AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> The new simplified swirl looks cleaner, and it would be nice to move
> to a free-er font. The example changes to the website made it look
Might it be worth considering using the new font & so on even if we end
up keeping the curren
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:21:09AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Frans Pop wrote:
>> Disappointing to see such an announcement without any prior discussion
>> on d-project, d-devel or d-vote. Some explanation of how and by who
>> this decision was reached would be appreciated.
> The Release Team pr
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 09:34:26AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Mark Brown wrote:
> > Right, it appears to be trying to make sure that someone might possibly
> > run into in Debian has been covered. Like I say, this is a large part
> > of my problem with it at this point -
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 03:02:52PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Friday 17 July 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> > achievable or useful goal and it does lock out people like translators
> > (though that's more of a theoretical concern than a practical one).
> That last is simp
an announcement at some
point that
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 09:20:00PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Personally I think it's far more interesting to try to get an idea of
> > how they'll handle things if they're working on something they've not
> > looked at
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 03:46:50PM +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> On Thu Jun 25 13:23, Mark Brown wrote:
> > I stopped being an AM largely as a result of the introduction of the
> > templated questions. I felt that all I was doing was shooting enormous
> I didn't think t
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 02:34:12PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> The NM process should neither be pain for the NM nor for the AM. If it is I'm
> happy to hear the facts why it is pain, instead of useless babbling.
I stopped being an AM largely as a result of the introduction of the
templated ques
On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 12:59:02AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> Maybe it makes sense to enhance planet to collapse microblogging feeds
> into at most one item per day via some special-handling?
That works rather poorly with a lot of microblogging use - if people
start having conversations you ge
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 03:29:11AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> My comments were solely intended to point out the possible cultural
> difference and the fact that many people in the US will have a strong
> reaction to this sort of thing. (I'm one of them. Age discrimination
> makes me extremely
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 07:36:02PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 01:20:32PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Non-packaging contributors were always supported in the current NM
> > process - this issue was discussed at the time the process was created
>
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 11:36:42AM +0200, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
> But the more important part is IMO that the proposal *finally* respects
> the non-packaging contributors (and there are many, I guess). For them
> we can now have similar steps which in the end means DD rights without
> the need of
On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 09:20:55PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Monday 06 August 2007 1:28:20 pm Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > But yes, I do think that we should at least try to keep planet without
> > much noise otherwise it'll get boring to read and lose its meaning.
> Actually, I don't read Pl
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:30:24PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Also, I can already see opposition to a committee which is only elected
> once, and can then change its own membership at will, while retaining
> all of its the powers that the originally elected members were given.
> That simply sound
On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 05:19:43PM +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> How about improving the NM application process so that people don't have
> to spend 4 months waiting for an AM[1,2,3,4], or to have their accounts
> created [5,6,7,8], or to be approved by FD[6,7]. Then there might not be
> such a
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 02:34:55PM +0100, James Herrington wrote:
> Does anyone know of any graphic/web work available on the debian project?
DebConf, the Debian conference, was looking for some logos for the
upcoming conference in Edinburgh. See this mailing list thread for more
information:
On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 04:50:50PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Feb 2007, Mark Brown wrote:
> > You are assuming that the person sending the e-mail is aware that
> > the information they are sending is going to end up publically
> > visible.
> So indicat
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 12:16:52PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> That's up to the person behind the *my* you wrote, disclose $ADDRESS
> and $NUMBER. The same can't be said about our email address, so what's
> the point really? I don't think the DSA members will want to disclose
> this kind of inf
On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 12:54:41AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sure, I just wanted to show it can be used for anything you'd do via
> --edit-keys. I'm not sure what classes of changes keyring-maint
> typically makes so it seemed best to cover all of them.
There's a fairly detailed changelog in the
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 10:06:47AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> softwares) and anyone is free to open bugs with debsecan output and
> stuff like that. Don't tell me that "hey, what's the alpha machine
> status?" and keyring-maint requests will leak information.
Off the top of my head "Please se
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 10:55:03AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > There are also smartcard based tokens (like GnuPG cards) which don't
> > require retyping of codes.
> Don't they then require specific hardware when used
On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 03:05:33PM +0100, Mario Lang wrote:
> In my opinion, RSA tokens are very evil, from an accessibility point of view.
> Since you effectively state that only people with working eye-sight
> are competent enough to use your system.
There are also smartcard based tokens (like
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 05:03:29PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> I have tried to RECOMPILE some packages in Sarge but failed.
> The Binaries are working. It seems, thet the Maintainer had
> used a machine where the Build was successfull, but no other
> one can do it because it FTBFS
Source up
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 03:07:11PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 11:00:44PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > To those who consider ROM-less hardware cheap and nasty I suggest the
> > opposite is true. I design hardware (FPGAs) professionally for expensive
> > communications
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 09:15:12AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:23:29 -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > aren't software. So if firmware was already supposed to be covered
> > under the DFSG, how is this reconciled with the fact that no one
> > ever wo
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 09:40:12PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Simply change the NMUs to be always 0-day, for all bugs >=3Dnormal. Which
> > means - upload and mail to BTS at the same time.
> Would that mean we get BTS+NMU tennis instead of BTS tennis,
> wh
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 01:35:03PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> will be public) or the FSF's violation address (private AIUI)
> for review, to let those who can act decide what to do about it?
Your understanding is correct - the FSF doesn't publish information sent
to their licensing issues address by
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 10:16:42PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Unfortunately, It's still there. Maybe the lack of updates indicates
> that the project is already dead, or something like that. Given their
> business model (which does neither promote business nor free software),
> this wouldn't
On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 03:08:17PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Ah, guess I missed that message, thanks. Well, though the source is more
> credible, AFAICT this is still hearsay... does anyone know where this
> assertion actually originated?
I seem to recall one of the ftpmasters saying this
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 08:20:07PM +0200, R. Armiento wrote:
> Since the main issue on my mind was "do people feel that it is ok that
> this goes into the sarge release?", exactly what would have been proper
> procedure? How long should I have waited before bringing it to the list?
I'd only hav
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 03:48:22PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Mark Brown wrote:
> > It doesn't seem like an unreasonable concern for them to be raising.
> As a bug. It's not reasonable to bring it here the next day.
No, but not quite so obviously malicious as you seem to
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 11:22:53AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Is R Armiento trolling and trying to block release?
> I can only wonder at the motives.
It doesn't seem like an unreasonable concern for them to be raising.
The timing is (to say the least) unfortunate but that needn't be
malicious.
--
"
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 04:00:01PM -0500, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> In the end, isn't this a blog aggregator? It isn't a mailing list and I don't
> think the same rules apply. Effectively, Planet is trying to impose editorial
> conditions on peoples *diaries*.
There are already limited restrictio
")
Fcc: +sent-mail
Mail-Followup-To: debian-project@lists.debian.org
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 03:11:10PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
[Note Mail-Followup-To:]
> [I'm a little disappointed I've had only one response so far. I guess
> that means the rest of you who are contributing to this thread
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 06:22:11PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Mark Brown wrote:
> >about this proposal. Hrm. Thinking about it, a section like that would
> >be more of a parallel to the proposed data distribution.
> Uh, distributing data has a whole range of dif
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 01:55:34PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 12:44:36PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > the host system. That would suggest that it would also be worth having
> > a separate section specifically for data to be downloaded to hardware,
&g
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 01:55:21PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Le Mercredi 6 Avril 2005 13:44, Mark Brown a ?crit?:
> > on the host system. That would suggest that it would also be worth
> > having a separate section specifically for data to be downloaded to
> > hardwar
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 09:08:21AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> As thus i was wondering if, together with the volatile effort, it would not be
> time for us to split the non-free archive into two parts, namely :
> 1) non-free-but-freely-distributable
> 2) rest of non-free
While that does loo
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 12:33:17AM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
> I'd prefer not to imagine, of course; either he, or anyone in the ftpmaster
> role, could say " gave him the details", and, voila, I wouldn't
> need to imagine at all. Even, however, if he asked nicely and got what he
> wanted, I have
On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 04:28:05PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> I described the situation as perceived by numerous (if not most)
> developers. If it is an insult to you, maybe you are doing something
> wrong?
You know, it would probably have been possible to talk about openness in
apt developm
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 02:12:58AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Thanks for that and the comments off-list. What would the period
> summaries have done to help you with the Eclipse thread? Or did you
They'd have helped me either keep up with what's going on without
actually looking at the list or at lea
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 03:29:35AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> I stopped making the periodic summaries and no-one has complained yet.
> I don't think that communicating what -legal is discussing is very
> interesting to most debian people. I am keeping notes for my own sake at
For what it's worth I'd
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 04:02:50PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> You'd have to ask people actually maintaing non-free packages here. From
> the discussions on -vote, I was under this impression. I could well be
> wrong though.
I'd have thought anyone keeping up with these threads on -vote is
disp
On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 08:37:39AM +0200, Benoit Peccatte wrote:
> Do you expect users who don't know anything about linux to product a
> useful bug report ?
Sure. A useful bug report is one that gives enough information to allow
developers to understand and reproduce a problem so they can work
On Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 03:36:24PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
> point of view, bible-kjv-text is in there because it's useful
> reference material. I would support packaging, e.g., the
It's also data for the bible-kjv package.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream -
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 05:49:07PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> It is far harder to remember all the timezone names, probably. Do you know
> from the top of your head what is BST (or BRST as we often use it here?)
Surely everyone knows that that's British Summer Time?
--
"You gr
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 09:13:34AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I assume this means local time for auric, but it might be nice to add
> > the timezone identifier.
> Oh come on! If you ask somebody on the street for the current time,
> do you expect him to answer wit
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 03:42:36PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> I've seen these not yet used guidelines for taking over packages and I
Those guidelines have been used at least once.
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.
f you got the
mail from admin could -discuss arrange not to send you another copy).
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
EUFShttp://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/filmsoc/
hassle for some people than you seem to realise (perhaps this is a USA
thing?) and doesn't do anything useful. The applicant has already
physically met another developer, which is far more like the sort of
contact you're trying to reproduce than having a couple of developers
look at
n issue at all. No effort being
made to verify that the photo corresponds to the person, all that is
being required is that the applicant can provide a photo (not photo ID
unless I misremember what Dale said when I asked him).
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
ake sure that these hoops
achieve a useful purpose.
As far as this one goes, I'm not sure either way.
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
EUFShttp://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/filmsoc/
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 04:05:06PM +, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > [Reply-To: set to drop the old nm-admin list]
I've just dropped it this time.
> I don't own a scanner. I know several friends who do, and under extreeme
That depen
not be
enthused about having random people walking in and asking to use them if
it wasn't in connection with something they were printing (not to
mention the prohibitavely expensive charges last time I had cause to get
a printer to do some scanning, though it was exceptionally high quality).
-
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 02:32:01PM +, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 03:06:36PM +, Dale Scheetz wrote:
[Reply-To: set to drop the old nm-admin list]
> about the difficulties of providing "adequate" iden
e
> other.
But it just has to be a picture, not photo ID, and it doesn't need to be
verified by anyone other than the applicant?
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
EUFShttp://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 06:14:56AM +1000, Anand Kumria wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 02:56:10PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The problem is with applicants who basically don't respond when NM tries
> > to get in touch with them, and it seems fair to put some of the eff
only thing that didn't feature at all
in the previous NM process is the tasks and skills bit, and that's
something that would have to be faced anyway.
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
EUFSht
suggest taking a look at what actually happens in the NM process - it
isn't nearly so fearful and difficult as you seem to think.
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
EUFShttp://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societ
On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 03:23:06PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> Am Mit, 26 Jul 2000 15:11:08 Mark Brown Sie:
> > It's not about the entry in the queue - it's about the time it takes the
> > application manager to work this out when they try to process that
> &g
the time it takes the
application manager to work this out when they try to process that
applicant. It's frustrating and it's time that could be better spent
getting another applicant through the process.
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 06:39:50PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> The BTS is a commodity and can be run anywhere. The mailing lists are
> still there.
The BTS and the bug submission tools currently don't have a very good
concept of multiple bug tracking systems.
--
Mark Brown ma
s a move to
> specifically collect the various other add-on components such as
> "experimental", "orphaned", "non-free" and "contrib" and to clearly
> separate these from the "main" collection.
>
> -
ot the avalibility that's the problem. It's all the stuff that
goes into creating and maintaining the packages. Not everyone wants or
needs to use non-free, but the people who do may well end up noticing a
drop in quality. Like it or not this will reflect upon Debian.
--
Mark Brown m
about the non-freeness of the software he
> tries to get/install.
And, perhaps more to the point, let them read the license of a non-free
package before rather than after they install it.
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.ed.ac
port them, but we would be removing pretty much all of the
support we currently provide them with (assuming the BTS goes along with
the archives, which seems likely).
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
EUFS
orried about "removing non-free from Debian".
Perhaps you would prefer it if everyone wrote "removing all the support
provided for using non-free software with Debian"? I'm not sure how
much of it is careless wording and how much of it is real
misunderstanding.
--
Mark Brown
nd that, what do we gain? If a non-free
archive is created then it is still going reflect on Debian. If none is
created then (at least for the time being) its absence will be noticed.
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broon
expect that reading from a server not on the
local network would give terrible interactive performance so people didn't
consider it a sensible idea and didn't include any authentication
mechanism. Remote bandwidth and latency are still an issue for a lot of
sites today. There's a
7;s a copy hanging around...").
Anyway, it's not a major issue - access to Incoming is normally not
essential.
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
EUFShttp://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/filmsoc/
pgp5P1ICROacU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
a FTP as well as
HTTP? Both can have problems with firewalls and forced proxying, but
between the two one of them usually works. I would check that only HTTP
was mentioned in the original announcement, but I'm behind a broken web
proxy right now :-) .
--
Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (
84 matches
Mail list logo
