Friendly,
Sven Luther
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 09:45:35AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The final results are in:
>
> Summary table:
> Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total
> ---++-++-++---++--
> armel || 3 |
, like said, i have been hurt like no other DD has
ever been hurt before me, and each time another stab is taken against me it
is as if the wound is fresh again, and the hurt comes all over again.
Do you really think i deserved this ? Really ?
Please, don't do this anymore, and leave me in peace,
Sadly,
Sven Luther
Hello, ...
This is the first time in the over-a-year that i have been banned from the
debian mailing lists that i try to go around the ban to post an appeal to
the whole debian community. And i am sorry to come again with this.
I write this, because even despite what debian has done to me, i sti
me. This mail will thus most probably not reach the mailing lists,
consider bouncing it if you consider it appropriate.
Sadly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ld
not have expulsed me, but rather should have given me more support in
the work i tried to do for debian. Your lose,
Sadly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
t; to keep our word on the social contract, what _can_ we be trusted with?
IF you really think so, then why did you sabotage my efforts to reach a
GR which could be used as a basis to address this issue with the
hardware manufacturers last year ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ttacked when this issue came back last year, and
the sabotaging of my effort to go in a right direction, and prepare a GR
that could be used to build on and approach the hardware manufacturers,
how do you expect anything to have changed ? Especially since i was
expulsed from debian since then, and in gener
team-based with inter-team
communication and multiple backups setup.
This is i believe the major challenge that debian has been facing into all his
structural positions, and altough some areas made the move cleanly, altough
not without growing pains, the buildd infrastructure is maybe not one o
d lately ? I think mips/mipsel, and some other arch where concerned.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
aybe some kind of assistant secretary either
permanent or delegated for the occasion.
Anthony, can you comment on this ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
possible other amendments (like a rewording of Josselin's proposal on top of
the consensual proposal for example).
On behalf of the Debian Kernel Team,
Friendly,
Sven Luther
[1] - http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007
[2] - http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2006/10/msg00183.html
ppose the vote will be void anyway,
and i strongly call for everyone to vote further discussion over the other
solutions.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
revent further discussion at a later time, and
indeed our DPL has already said he intent to trigger further discussion about
these issues around the edinbourg debconf time.
So, i am not going to vote on this one.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 08:18:28PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > Since the firmware blobs are not derivative works of the kernel, but
> > constitute mere agregation in the same binary format, the authors of other
> > pieces of GPLed code fo the
t doesn't allow us to distribute the
problematic code in those cases.
Since the firmware blobs are not derivative works of the kernel, but
constitute mere agregation in the same binary format, the authors of other
pieces of GPLed code fo the linux kernel cannot even sue us for distributing
t
with this interpretation.
A few very vocal people do. I guess they can be counted on the fingers of both
hands or so.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 01:10:16AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Unfortunately, other mailing list discussions have been less
> happy. A somewhat acrimonious argument between Sven Luther and members
> of the d-i team spread out across various lists, starting at
> [3]. There has been
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 05:26:38PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 04:13:10PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > So, with all that said, do you still believe it is normal that a perfectly
> > running daily build was rejected in maybe a few minutes/hours after i sent
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 03:58:17AM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 08:28:11PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Notice also that both you and Colin Watson, where donated pegasos machines,
> > (and guess who arranged that), so the unavailability of a decent bui
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 03:21:12PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 12:40:48AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 03:34:30PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:46:24PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > &g
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 11:49:08PM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Sven Luther said:
> > you kicked me out [...]
> > just to get ride of me [...]
> > it was more important to get ride of sven [...]
> > that you kicked the powerpc ma
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 12:44:13AM +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:46:24PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > Well, it is what i see. There is nothing to clarify on this
> > point. They removed me to get ride of me, and despite Colin's help,
>
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 03:34:30PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:46:24PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > The maintainer is held responsible (and frans and joeyh have not stepped
> > down
> > from reminding me of this in the past) of the b
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 09:47:33PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060427 17:03]:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 04:52:09PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060427 15:05]:
> > > > Andreas, do you
weeks without being fixed. You are fully responsible
for this failure, and should assume your responsability.
But then i know already that you are not going to assume it, and like always
just do on more round of sven-bashing, and hope everything will be fine.
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 06:46:11PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> (dropping the ridiculous CC list, AFAICT everybody is subscribed)
>
> On Thursday 27 April 2006 17:47, Sven Luther wrote:
> > None, it is the full decision of the project admin, and i believe what
> > happened
nal
considerations overstep his responsabilities.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:32:42PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:10:17PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 04:52:09PM +0200, Andr
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:10:17PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 04:52:09PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060427 15:05]:
> > > > Andreas, do you have an explanatio
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 04:52:09PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060427 15:05]:
> > Andreas, do you have an explanation of why d-i commit access was taken from
> > me, and why i find out only now as i was going to fix the issue ?
>
> ht
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 03:17:08PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 03:07:36PM +0200, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:27:35PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:19:34PM +0200, Sven Lut
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 03:15:17PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:19:34PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Because they kicked out the powerpc porter ? Do you not think this is reason
> > enough to consider debian for powerpc dead
>
> No, this is only
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:40:08PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Of course, best that could happen now would be if someone just takes up
> >> the loose ends, and tries to fix the issues - and I hope someone just
> >
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:27:35PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:19:34PM +0200, Sven Luther
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I was going to fix it, maybe it would have been fixed already, but no,
> > the d-i team decided this otherwise.
>
&g
again with a straight
face that i am over-reacting ?
friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 01:59:54PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Toni L. Harbaugh-Blackford [Contr] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060427 13:53]:
> > On Thu, 27 Apr 2006, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060427 13:23]:
> > > > Dear fellow po
ng to take their responsabilities and
are screwing our powerpc users.
They are not worth to be debian developpers, if you would ask me, and in any
case, they are not true to the social contract.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 12:53:12PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Thursday 27 April 2006 12:14, Sven Luther wrote:
> > 1) daily build business card and netinst isos are failing to build
> > since april 1, which means they don't include the broadcom tg3 module
> > at al
ve absolutely nothing to do with
ide-generic, but some brokeness involving the ide-modular patch from Herbert
Xu, which was now dropped.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 02:24:23AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:28:14PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > I was going to make a large answer where i was going to denouse the
> > inexactitudes and false claims of this clearly inflamatory mail, but i wil
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:34:09PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-19 12:28]:
> > Anyway, Steve, please try to live up to your own standard, and cut
> > the ad-hominem attacks out in the future.
>
> Describing the situation
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:44:05PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> [Sven Luther]
> > I am not saying that there needs to be an immediate response, or all
> > patches need to be applied, but i believe that it is elementary
> > politeness from a package maintainer,
attacks out in the future.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 08:29:18AM +0100, Martin Wuertele wrote:
> * Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-19 08:06]:
>
> > The question is if the problems with the patches and the reason for not
> > applying it will be commented, thus giving the author a chance to modi
and the reason for not
applying it will be commented, thus giving the author a chance to modify it,
or change his approach to fixing the bug, or if the patch will be utherly
ignored, which is an act of total contempt to his author as well as the users
affected by the bug.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 03:07:41PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 10595 March 1977, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > There is a difference here though, this is my public process for expulsion,
>
> No, this is a random flamewar on a random list and has *nothing* to do
> with
paragraph with any
> number of other people, including Debian developers.
>
> IMHO This is not sufficient grounds for expelling him.
>
>
> PS: I noticed you had the header set:
>
> Mail-Followup-To: Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> debian-devel@lists.debian
and, trying to forget the issue. He sais he had no time immediately,
but would look into it.
This whole issue still blew up because of a single harmless comment i made on
wednesday, and my insatisfaction for jonas not crediting my work in solving
the bug, which is a sad thing.
Friendly,
Sven Lut
erator issue ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:15:15PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> Replying to this since it is addressed to me personally.
Err, ...
This line seems to add some incomprehension. I am no more readin debian-devel,
nor any of the other mailing lists. Steve, on irc, has informed about the mail
he
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 06:33:00PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 15 Mar 2006, Sven Luther told this:
> > You did never intent to do so, since you clearly said numerous time
> > that you where frustrated with the kernel team taking over your work
> > on kernel-package,
that some good comes out of this thread.
I think i have already improved my approach, i removed myself from most irc
channels, and don't read most mailing lists.
> I would appreciate it if others would consider how these observations apply
> to them as well. I&
lying with more erroneous
> arguments" would be safer.
Yeah, will use that nexty time. I don't know if native speaker realise
this, because many non-native speaker seem to have a fluent english, but there
are times when the right words just don't come, and you are grasping with
se in cluttering up the lists any more.
>
> Sorry for not doing this but this mail made me discover you expulsion
> thing and I wanted to give my public support to Sven at least once.
Thanks, ...
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 11:07:02AM +1100, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 05:48:38PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> >I'm a little sympathetic, because I used to suffer from the same
> >disease, and I still have the occasional outbreak, but I'm trying
> >hard, and mostly ge
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 05:48:38PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 15-Mar-06, 15:40 (CST), Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But do you think that anything i said in those is insulting in some way, or
> > a
> > reason for me to be expelled from debian ?
&g
nicely for ubuntu, so why not for us ?
I leave this all to you, i hope you are up to the responsability, and will not
participate again in the kernel team until i am asked to.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ingly broke their system.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 08:23:53PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Sven Luther [Wed, Mar 15 2006, 08:04:50PM]:
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 11:53:04AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > > I strongly agree that Sven Luther is a disruptive element, and
> >
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 08:48:48PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 07:21:09PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I had decided to keep silent for the next few week to let matters settle,
> > but
> > as you ask directly and i was pointer to your questi
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 11:17:06PM +0200, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 08:08:27PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I am still a bit disgusted of seeing a bug report i provided to ubuntu, with
> > patch and all the proper research immediately after the breezy beta go
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 02:26:09PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > I've never worked closely with Sven Luther, but I've lurked in some
> > teams he's member of, so if my capability as an observer is worth
> > something to you, you
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 10:54:58AM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 07:26:07PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 05:56:10PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > I hadn't replied to the bug report because I wasn't involved in the
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 11:53:04AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I strongly agree that Sven Luther is a disruptive element, and
> his presence hurts the project more than it helps. I have found a
> pattern of behaviour from him, where any discussion first focuses on
limits of
> my mind.
>
> Technical problems are hard, but we love them; social problems are
> harder, and we repeteadly ignore them until they explode.
And ignore people who, maybe not directly, ask for help, and fall of them like
a pack of wolves when they stumble, right ?
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
o note that jonas is not excempt
from the fault, and that other had had trouble dealing with him, even if you
didn't know that when you made your hasty judgement.
Friendly, still,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 05:56:10PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 05:56:05PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > I was a bit short on you, because you started to make noise about the reason
> > for the refusal being a #include being wrongly placed i
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 03:56:48PM +0100, Jorgen Schaefer wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:01:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I am going through the expulsion process to have Sv
you apologize for that, so should we expulse you for both being
offensive to me (and having gone over to the ennemy :) ?
So, please tell me when i have said anything such to you in the context of
debian, i would be very surprised about it.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:01:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am going through the expulsion process to have Sven Luther removed
> from the project. The process is outlined here:
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/08/msg5.html>,
> and
Let's move this to elsewhere than -vote for technical discussion, d-ppc and
d-ppc64 are good places for this.
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 02:21:12AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:03:47PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Are bruckner and voltaire overloade
27;t you just join and commit your fixes before anybody tried to
> > release it?
>
> I can.
:)
Guido, be warned that Bastian often communicates with a few monosylabes and
SVN commits :) This doesn't make working with him too problematic usually
though :)
Friendly,
Sven Luther
clude an URL to wherever such a patch is in the README.Debian of the
packages, should be enough.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e some kind of external patch to the kernel floating
around, and having no cooperation between the XEN team and the kernel team
will kind of encourage people to build their own xen kernel from mainline
upstream sources, which i believe is not what we want.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, em
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 04:03:09PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 09:43:23AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > [ Reply-to debian-project ]
> >
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > given the size of the project, it's very difficult for any of us to
any kind of pressure and strategic choices can be made if they
are open, not that this would be the case for us, us being all nice folk and
everyone, but everyone can read those public poll information, and some of
those may be less nice :)
I strongly vote for this idea in any case.
Friendly,
Sven Lut
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 11:43:27PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 03:54:23PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > No, like chosing ati over nvidia for graphic cards, or silicon image over
> > others for SATA cards.
>
> Wait a minute, did I miss a memo? ATI is
guess that
almost everyone understood what i was trying to say though.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 09:23:41AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 03:57:01PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:35:02AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > That's not correct. The project simply voted not to removed it at that
>
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:35:02AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 09:22:07AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I want to remind you all, that previous to the two GRs which clarified the
> > meaning of what we must consider free, we had a widely disputed GR on the
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 10:55:57AM +0100, Xavier Roche wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Fonts or documentations are not softwares, for god's sake!
> > everything that is not hardware is software
>
> So a cat is a software, or a hardware ? Do
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 09:37:31AM +0100, Xavier Roche wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Nope, but i think those who try to hide the issue of non-free material in
> > main, by insisting that it is not software
>
> Fonts or documentations are not soft
let-s-delay-this-for-sarge-only confirmation GR).
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
eriod, and then open
> the door for people to call for votes.
Hi, ...
a single line telling us the title or the URL of the GR in question would have
been welcome. I guess this means there is only one GR open, but still it would
have been neat to clarify this :)
Friendly,
Sven Luther
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 03:44:12AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 01:53:26AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >> Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >>
o do uploads to ubuntu also ? How many is most in this case ?
Do they also know about it ? I mean i was never proposed to make ubuntu
maintenance of my packages for example, so i wonder how this works.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 10:46:51AM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 07:24:57PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 09:20:33AM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > In practice, it doesn't work out to mean the same thing, however. Most o
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 10:54:40AM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 07:35:55PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Arg, and to make matters worse, this discussion is CCed to a
> > closed-moderated-list, Matt, this is really not a friendly way to have a
> >
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 07:24:57PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 09:20:33AM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 07:08:38PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > > I keep hearing this, but I really don't believe it. In Debian,
> &g
will have some trouble checking and testing any possible fix, not having a
ubuntu install done.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 01:11:00PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > For the installer, sure, but the generation of the d-i kernel .udebs is only
> > marginally of their relevance, and furthermore they don't want the
> > responsability associated with it, a
On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 12:39:09PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Sven Luther
>
> | I believe it has also an influence on the place where the source package is
> | ohold (alioth svn repo over whatever strange stuff ubuntu uses), and they
> said
> | we should use their syste
mportant and core d-i work.
> > d-i is only a part of the problem anyway, and i believe the less
> > problematic.
> > out-of-tree modules and third-party patches are a worse mess.
>
> Hm, which out-of-tree modules do you consider to be release critical,
> i.e. we canno
s issue, and always
being second-guessed and criticized by external folk who think they know best,
is definitively something i am not happy about, and i guess that may probably
show in the tone of those mails.
Damn it, we are trying to make live easier for both the release team and the
d-i team, and the
and i believe it is maybe
best so for both involved. There can be cooperation without sharing all the
infrastructure and packaging. Other less high-profile daughter-distros are
probably simply reusing the debian kernel, and this is probably the best way
of doing this.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
-
L's kernel, or collaborate with them to maintain a
> stable kernel tree, or something?
Why doesn't debian really collaborate with ubuntu on the kernels, which would
be more natural. Debian use mostly the mainline upstream kernels, which is
where everything goes back in anyway, so ...
Frie
not to acceptable, so this would be a bug to be
fixed.
But yes, udev is the problematic case, altough i run 2.6.14 with sarge udev
and it works.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 06:04:39PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > Indeed. The d-i team usually says "no" outright to any kind of proposal of
> > this kind, so it is up to the kernel team to come up with an implementation
> > which convinces them :)
On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 12:13:37AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 January 2006 23:52, Sven Luther wrote:
> > The current proposal is about simply using the same .udeb organisation
> > and move it inside the linux-2.6 common package, which is something
> > that wo
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 06:09:18PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > And have you added stable-security into the equation ? Your choices of back
> > in
> > april are in part responsible for the abysmal situation in stable-security
> > with regard to kerne
1 - 100 of 515 matches
Mail list logo
