Hi,
On 14/9/19 4:21 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 9/12/19 2:47 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> 1) there are significant problems we'd run into if we forbid non-free tools
>> in
>> Debian work
>
> Sorry, WHAAAT ? That's shocking to read this from the DPL.
> Are you sure you didn't do a mistake in this
On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 12:25 PM Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> It's too native have such thoughts. It's never "too big to block".
s/native/naive/
--
Shengjing Zhu
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 7:05 PM Simon Richter wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 12:28:23PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
> > > Note that by way of counterargument, Google and its services have
> > > been blocked in mainland China by the Great Firewall for nearly a
> > > decade now, so I qu
On 2019, സെപ്റ്റംബർ 14 4:21:16 AM IST, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>On 9/12/19 2:47 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> 1) there are significant problems we'd run into if we forbid non-free
>tools in
>> Debian work
>
>Sorry, WHAAAT ? That's shocking to read this from the DPL.
>Are you sure you didn't do a mist
You are the heir to our late Canadian gold merchant $8.2 Million
Canadian dollar.
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 00:51:16 +0200
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Sorry, WHAAAT ? That's shocking to read this from the DPL.
> Are you sure you didn't do a mistake in this sentence?
Sorry, Sam is right, he just read and understand the DSC $1 right. If
one work on Debian with non-free tools that will not
On September 13, 2019 10:51:16 PM UTC, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>On 9/12/19 2:47 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> 1) there are significant problems we'd run into if we forbid non-free
>tools in
>> Debian work
>
>Sorry, WHAAAT ? That's shocking to read this from the DPL.
>Are you sure you didn't do a mist
Thomas Goirand writes:
> Sorry, WHAAAT ? That's shocking to read this from the DPL.
> Are you sure you didn't do a mistake in this sentence?
> There's absolutely no problem within the Debian project to forbid using
> non-free software.
I use a computer with non-free firmware and push my packagi
On 9/12/19 2:47 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 1) there are significant problems we'd run into if we forbid non-free tools in
> Debian work
Sorry, WHAAAT ? That's shocking to read this from the DPL.
Are you sure you didn't do a mistake in this sentence?
There's absolutely no problem within the Debian p
On 13.09.19 17:55, Russ Allbery wrote:
> There seems to be an obvious ordering issue here, namely that it's very
> weird to insist on the first (which has been the topic of this thread)
> before we insist on the second.
I wouldn't see it as an ordering issue - my POV is that each of these
issues
On 09/09/19 14:40, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Ondřej Surý writes:
Otherwise it doesn’t make any sense to remove external links to logos
and JavaScript from the documentation and then send everything to one
single US-based provider.
Exactly. I'd be worried if anything in Debian came preconfigured with
Hello,
On Thu 12 Sep 2019 at 09:35PM +02, Marc Haber wrote:
> How about documenting that branches prefixed with "wip" can be force
> pushed any time and people pulling from those branches should be
> expected to handle that?
This would be useful.
I would already assume any branch prefixed with
> "Bastian" == Bastian Blank writes:
Bastian> Hi Sam
Bastian> On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 05:35:10PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> The Salsa CA pipeline is recommended.
Bastian> For this I need to use my veto as Salsa admin. With the CI
Bastian> people we have to work through
Alf Gaida writes:
> Is it really so hard to understand? Github, Gitlab and other service are
> just tools. I don't care if they are free or non-free. No account, no
> participation. And if you had read the whole post - imho the best
> outcome woul be: No hosting of Debian packaging outside Debia
Hi
I've packaged DNF for Debian and would like to find someone to take over these
packages and maintain them as part of the distribution.
I'm not a DD and while I believe the packages to be of reasonable if not high
quality, I already have enough on my plate and know that I will not be able to
p
Hi Sam
On Sun, Sep 08, 2019 at 05:35:10PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> The Salsa CA pipeline is recommended.
For this I need to use my veto as Salsa admin. With the CI people we
have to work through too much problems first.
I don't have anything else to add for now.
Bastian
--
Totally illogic
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 02:51:47PM +0200, Alf Gaida wrote:
> On 9/13/19 10:18 AM, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 06:34:42PM +0200, Alf Gaida wrote:
> >> Regarding the workflow and participation - it might be a problem that
> >> one need an account for github or other non-free serv
On 13.09.19 15:10, Simon Richter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 02:51:47PM +0200, Alf Gaida wrote:
>
>> Is it really so hard to understand? Github, Gitlab and other service are
>> just tools. I don't care if they are free or non-free.
> For Debian, free software is kind of important.
>
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 02:51:47PM +0200, Alf Gaida wrote:
> Is it really so hard to understand? Github, Gitlab and other service are
> just tools. I don't care if they are free or non-free.
For Debian, free software is kind of important.
Simon
Le Vendredi, Septembre 13, 2019 15:00 CEST, gregor herrmann
a écrit:
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:14:13 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> > I did do a bit of looking at data.
> > In my unstable sources.list, there are 17863 source packages that
> > include salsa.debian.org in the vcs-git. Of those, 2192
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:14:13 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I did do a bit of looking at data.
> In my unstable sources.list, there are 17863 source packages that
> include salsa.debian.org in the vcs-git. Of those, 2192 are in the
> debian group.
> That's the largestsingle group; perl-team (next) c
On 9/13/19 10:18 AM, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 06:34:42PM +0200, Alf Gaida wrote:
>> Regarding the workflow and participation - it might be a problem that
>> one need an account for github or other non-free services - it's easy:
> You also need accounts for _free_ services, s
> "Holger" == Holger Levsen writes:
>> Mozilla really missed the ball on this one. OpenBSD already made
>> the necessary changes to Firefox. I think we should, too.
Holger> agreed.
OK, so, it seems like the way we do things, that's going to be the
firefox maintainer's decision.
On dv., set. 13 2019, Simon Richter wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 12:28:23PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Note that by way of counterargument, Google and its services
> have
> been blocked in mainland China by the Great Firewall for
> nearly a
> decade now, so I question whether there i
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 11:02:22PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Except DoH is *not* an anti-censorship feature. It is a feature that
> provides a net reduction in privacy.
agreed.
> CloudFlare says that it won't read your DNS requests -- scout's honour!
> -- but even if that's true and we can
On Sep 13, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> > We are talking about preventing large scale censorship (I do not think
> > that this is really about privacy) for *general users*: obviously *we*
> > already know about countless workarounds.
> That’s a false statement. Right now, we are talking about sending _
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 12:28:23PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Note that by way of counterargument, Google and its services have
> > been blocked in mainland China by the Great Firewall for nearly a
> > decade now, so I question whether there is really such a thing as
> > "too big to block
> On 13 Sep 2019, at 12:25, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
> We are talking about preventing large scale censorship (I do not think
> that this is really about privacy) for *general users*: obviously *we*
> already know about countless workarounds.
That’s a false statement. Right now, we are talking ab
On Sep 13, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> You shouldn't insist on always writing "their ISP", as if it was the
> only choice. It isn't. One can setup his own recursive DNS locally, for
> example. I've done this for years, as I didn't trust my ISP (first, in
Sure, me too: but it does not matter, because
On Sep 13, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> Note that by way of counterargument, Google and its services have
> been blocked in mainland China by the Great Firewall for nearly a
> decade now, so I question whether there is really such a thing as
> "too big to block."
This is a false dichotomy: not all nat
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 06:34:42PM +0200, Alf Gaida wrote:
> Regarding the workflow and participation - it might be a problem that
> one need an account for github or other non-free services - it's easy:
You also need accounts for _free_ services, so what do you want to say?
Bastian
--
Lots of
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 03:51:57PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Well, thanks for the rebuke. I hope I have clarified my thinking and
> please do the same again in future. (Or, indeed, right now, if you
> think this message is still frightening...)
I wish you could learn to *listen* first, then m
On 9/10/19 7:46 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> You obviously consider Mozilla's choices of trusted resolvers (currently
> Cloudflare, hopefully others too in the future) a bigger privacy risk
> for generic users (the one who use the browser defaults) than their ISP,
> I disagree.
You shouldn't insis
33 matches
Mail list logo
