Re: Contributor agreements and copyright assignment (was Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems)

2012-12-08 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 07:03:23PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 12/05/2012 06:15 AM, Steve Langasek wrote: > > I understand that concern and recognize that this is a not-uncommon > > sentiment among Debian folks; this very closely parallels the question of > > whether one is willing to release

Re: Ubuntu have done it again,

2012-12-08 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le dimanche 09 décembre 2012 à 00:46 +0100, Salvo Tomaselli a écrit : > > > We should make sure that people have to ask our permission before they use > > our code for any other purpose! And make sure they can't do evil with it! > That would be proprietary software... .-'---`-. ,' `.

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-08 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 12:14:30AM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Steve Langasek , 2012-12-08, 14:18: > >it might be worth considering whether we could instead solve all > >the real instances of A->B->C/D in the archive by converting all B > >to Arch: any in wheezy, and then just allowing the package

Re: Candidates for removal from testing (results)

2012-12-08 Thread Niels Thykier
On 2012-11-30 12:55, Niels Thykier wrote: > [...] > While slightly overdue; the results were 0 removals! \o/ > > --8<-- removals.txt --8<-- > # #668740/#668740 > remove dsc-statistics/201203250530-1 > Downgraded. > # #692623 > remove fossil/1:1.22.1-1 > Fixed in sid and wheezy (via t-p-u)

Re: Ubuntu have done it again,

2012-12-08 Thread Salvo Tomaselli
> We should make sure that people have to ask our permission before they use > our code for any other purpose! And make sure they can't do evil with it! That would be proprietary software... -- Salvo Tomaselli -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject o

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-08 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Steve Langasek , 2012-12-08, 14:18: it might be worth considering whether we could instead solve all the real instances of A->B->C/D in the archive by converting all B to Arch: any in wheezy, and then just allowing the package manager to treat *all* Arch: all packages as implicitly satisfying

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-08 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:20:00AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: > [Helmut Grohne] > > I ask you not to use this proposal for the following reasons: > > * Given a package it is now much harder to see whether it is tagged M-A > >or not. Especially you can no longer determine the tagging by si

Re: Architecture: all + M-A: foreign

2012-12-08 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 02:05:13AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: > In bug #695229, I noted that an Architecture: all package really should > be Multi-Arch: foreign. This led to an IRC discussion between Goswin, > Steve L. and me in which I formulated the proposal: > If a package is 'Architec

Re: Ubuntu have done it again,

2012-12-08 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 12:09:10AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: > this time installing surveillance code. > > http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/12/07/1527225/rms-speaks-out-against-ubuntu > http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/ubuntu-spyware-what-to-do "Again"? Looks like old news. -- WBR, wRAR signa

Re: Ubuntu have done it again,

2012-12-08 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 07:06:02PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : > Le Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 10:41:37AM +0100, Svante Signell a écrit : > > > > Maybe debian-devel is not the > > correct list, but the decline of Debian users was discussed here and not > > considered off-topic. > > Hi Svante, > >

Re: Ubuntu have done it again,

2012-12-08 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 10:41:37AM +0100, Svante Signell a écrit : > > Maybe debian-devel is not the > correct list, but the decline of Debian users was discussed here and not > considered off-topic. Hi Svante, I confirm that debian-devel is not the correct list. Its scope is not defined by the

Re: Ubuntu have done it again,

2012-12-08 Thread Svante Signell
On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 10:11 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 09:52:36AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: > > Something has gone completely wrong with the PR for Debian, suffering > > from the success of derived distributions like Ubuntu. > > You are welcome to join the effort

Re: Ubuntu have done it again,

2012-12-08 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 09:52:36AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: > Something has gone completely wrong with the PR for Debian, suffering > from the success of derived distributions like Ubuntu. You are welcome to join the efforts of the people on the debian-publicity mailing list that work daily on

Re: Ubuntu have done it again,

2012-12-08 Thread Svante Signell
On Sat, 2012-12-08 at 00:34 +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > Le samedi, 8 décembre 2012 00.09:10, Svante Signell a écrit : > > this time installing surveillance code. > > While these concerns are certainly serious, they do not concern the > "Development of Debian". In fact it does, see belo

Re: Ubuntu have done it again,

2012-12-08 Thread Martin Zobel-Helas
Hi, On Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 00:08:36 +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > On 7 December 2012 23:36, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Svante Signell writes: > > > >> this time installing surveillance code. > > > >> http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/12/07/1527225/rms-speaks-out-against-ubuntu > >> http://www.