On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 03:25:45AM -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> I was unable to locate the quote, but it seems that the quote is/could
> be taken liteally. Why not modify the quote to state that it is
> metaphorical by using something like 'Every Debian developer is an
> Ubuntu developer in the same
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 21:51, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 09:41:58AM +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
wrote:
> > syncinc _to_ debian implies that changes are _pushed_ to Debian
> > regularly, whereas in actuallity they're simply made available for pull
> > by Debian (in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:26:05AM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 10:01 +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > * Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-17 11:36]:
> > > Kennedy wasn't a citizen of Berlin, either, not literally. T
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 12:36:12PM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-18 10:26]:
> > Mr Zimmerman's reference to Kennedy is an excellent example of such a
> > metaphorical construct. When Kennedy said that, there will undoubtedly
> > have been people who u
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 12:30:22PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 11:01, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > So you are saying it's the Debian Developer's job to pull changes from
> > ubuntu back? If that is an official statement, then that would be useful
> > for a d-d-a mail so w
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:01:31AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-17 11:36]:
> > I'm saying that you should pause and consider that you're looking at a
> > world-writable resource before treating its contents as a position statement
> > on behalf of the
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 09:41:58AM +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 January 2006 00:39, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > The full quote is "We sync our packages to Debian regularly, because that
> > introduces the latest work, the latest upstream code, and the newest
> > packaging
On Wednesday, 18 January 2006 11:30, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 11:01, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > * Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-17 11:36]:
> > So again you are saing it's the Debian Developer's job to look around
>
> Yes it is. and you shouldn't restrict yours
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 09:41:58AM +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 January 2006 00:39, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > Given that you saw this on a wiki page, a disclaimer about wiki contents
> > should be implicit. However, regardless of whether it's an accurate
> > quote, it's
[don't be confused about the To header, this is merly just for testing a
propable b0rked setup]
* Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-18 10:26]:
> Mr Zimmerman's reference to Kennedy is an excellent example of such a
> metaphorical construct. When Kennedy said that, there will undoubtedl
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 11:01, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-17 11:36]:
> So again you are saing it's the Debian Developer's job to look around
Yes it is. and you shouldn't restrict yourself to ubuntu, checking what other
Debian derivates, Fedora, Open
On Tuesday 17 January 2006 00:39, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 02:59:58AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > It's also about false statements like "We sync our packages to Debian
> > regularly," because that simply doesn't happen for quite a lot of us,
> > otherwise all these heat
[EMAIL PROTECTED], if you read that: Fix your mail setup, I'm not
interested in getting double mails from whatever setup you have there.
Thanks]
* Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-17 11:36]:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 06:46:26PM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>> Do we call RMS a Debian
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 10:01 +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-17 11:36]:
> > Kennedy wasn't a citizen of Berlin, either, not literally. The world
> > understood what he meant, though, when he said (somewhat awkwardly) that he
> > was.
>
> Again my quest
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mdz writes:
>> Have you ever received such a notification?
>
> Yes.
I haven't. I'm going to cry now :-(((
--
Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAI
I wrote:
> I am pleased when downstream distributions notify me that they are using
> my packages.
mdz writes:
> Have you ever received such a notification?
Yes.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 06:39:37PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> Matt Zimmerman writes:
> > Is the meaning of this statement truly unclear to you...
>
> "Every Debian developer is also an Ubuntu developer" implies to me that I
> can make uploads to Ubuntu. I can't (not that I'm asking for that
> pr
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 06:46:26PM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-16 15:39]:
> > Is the meaning of this statement truly unclear to you, or is this purely a
> > rhetorical point? Under the assumption that you read it differently than I
> > do, I'll atte
* Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-16 15:39]:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 02:59:58AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>> It's not about succeeding. It's about false statements all the time,
>> like "Every Debian developer is also an Ubuntu developer." If I were I
>> would know. And they are
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Robert Collins wrote:
> And yet most upstreams can get pretty much arbitrary code into Debian,
> just by committing it?. How many DD's read the -entire- diff on major
> version upgrades from upstream. And not just read, audit.
Not all, but it might be quite a few more than wha
also sprach Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.01.17.0039 +0100]:
> Ubuntu is a Debian derivative. The work that Debian developers do is merged
> into Ubuntu as well. Most of the source packages in Ubuntu are identical to
> the ones in Debian. The statement that you quoted is an expression
Matt Zimmerman writes:
> Is the meaning of this statement truly unclear to you...
"Every Debian developer is also an Ubuntu developer" implies to me that I
can make uploads to Ubuntu. I can't (not that I'm asking for that
privilege). I don't doubt that it was meant as an expression of gratitude
On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 19:21 -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> > but I agree with it. I would also say that Debian's upstreams are, in the
> > same sense, Debian developers.
>
> I think that we probably have hundreds of upstreams who would react with
> everything from disbelief to anger if Debian claimed
Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 02:59:58AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > It's not about succeeding. It's about false statements all the time,
> > like "Every Debian developer is also an Ubuntu developer." If I were I
> > would know. And they are recompiling all my packages, so
On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 02:59:58AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> It's not about succeeding. It's about false statements all the time,
> like "Every Debian developer is also an Ubuntu developer." If I were I
> would know. And they are recompiling all my packages, so you can't even
> say that they
On 1/15/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you can't understand sarcasm, why didn't you read the part for
> people who can't understand sarcasm?
debian-announce is not meant to play games. Someone made a (perhaps
honest) mistake, and were duly criticised. But you know the rules.
* Sami Haahtinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-15 11:27]:
> Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>> It's also about false statements like "We sync our packages to Debian
>> regularly," because that simply doesn't happen for quite a lot of us,
>> otherwise all these heated discussions wouldn't happen.
>
> They ha
But Windows security advisories don't contain debian packages. Ubuntu
does contain close to all debian packages, and (I hope) most DDs have an
interest to include improvements of other distributions in their
packages (at least I do).
Maemo (from the Nokia 770 fame) contains Debian packages.
> You do realize that your work is out there for anyone to take and to
> modify. I agree that for the modified packages it should be more clear
> that the package has been modified by ubuntu and the maintainer or some
And why isn't this done? It's so simple to do. I would prefer to know about MY
On Sunday 15 January 2006 10:27, Sami Haahtinen wrote:
> What do you want?
Bugs filed in Debian's bts, with the patches attached and the rationale why
this patch is done.
Just like many DD work with upstream, by pushing non-Debian changes back
actively, and not just saying 'all are changes are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> It's also about false statements like "We sync our packages to Debian
> regularly," because that simply doesn't happen for quite a lot of us,
> otherwise all these heated discussions wouldn't happen.
They have their own timeta
* Sami Haahtinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-14 18:20]:
> I can understand that a part of the people behind Debian feel hostile
> against Ubuntu because it's succeeding in something that Debian was
> trying to achieve.
It's not about succeeding. It's about false statements all the time,
like "Ev
On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 07:35:04PM +0100, Willi Mann wrote:
>
> But Windows security advisories don't contain debian packages. Ubuntu
> does contain close to all debian packages, and (I hope) most DDs have an
> interest to include improvements of other distributions in their
> packages (at leas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 06:20:40PM +0200, Sami Haahtinen wrote:
>>I read the part about sarcasm and i partially argee with you. But i'm
>>with Andreas here. Your post didn't help anyone, the original Ubuntu
>>post was important
Sami Haahtinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I can understand that a part of the people behind Debian feel hostile
> against Ubuntu because it's succeeding in something that Debian was
> trying to achieve. But what i can't understand is that people behind
> Ubuntu are trying to reach out and build
Windows security advisories are surely important to quite a few
people, and probably to more readers of -devel-announce than Ubuntu
stuff. Are you saying that it would be okay to post these? If not,
then you need to rethink your reasoning here. Personally, I don't
think "important to the subscri
On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 06:20:40PM +0200, Sami Haahtinen wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > If you can't understand sarcasm, why didn't you read the part for
> > people who can't understand sarcasm?
>
> I read the part about sarcasm and i partially argee with you. But i'm
> with Andreas here. You
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> If you can't understand sarcasm, why didn't you read the part for
> people who can't understand sarcasm?
I read the part about sarcasm and i partially argee with you. But i'm
with Andreas here. Your post didn't help anyone, th
If you can't understand sarcasm, why didn't you read the part for
people who can't understand sarcasm?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital si
39 matches
Mail list logo
