Re: Bug#510415: Call for votes on Bug#510415: tech-ctte: Qmail inclusion (or not) in Debian

2009-08-29 Thread Andreas Barth
* Aníbal Monsalve Salazar (ani...@debian.org) [090829 12:39]: > On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 11:46:05AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > >[...] > >I think it's clear that option 3 wins. > > Your message wasn't signed. Where does the constitution require this? It also isn't required at all that somebody do

Bug#510415: Call for votes on Bug#510415: tech-ctte: Qmail inclusion (or not) in Debian

2009-08-29 Thread Aníbal Monsalve Salazar
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 11:46:05AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: >[...] >I think it's clear that option 3 wins. Your message wasn't signed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#510415: Call for votes on Bug#510415: tech-ctte: Qmail inclusion (or not) in Debian

2009-08-29 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 09:00:47PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > > I'm calling for a vote on the following options[1]: > > | 1. Qmail is to be allowed into the archive without special > | preconditions. Ftpmaster should perform standard NEW processing for > | licensing, copyright, and general pac