On Saturday 03 June 2006 16:57, Anthony Towns wrote:
> You can say that if you like, but please be aware that it's not Debian's
> position. Debian's position, as consistently expressed by ftpmaster,
> on this list, and in the press, is that the license is acceptable for
> non-free, and that is also
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:18:39AM -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> Too many excuses. All inadequate.
>
> It is past time that the covert actions of the "small cabal"
> were openly reviewed. The license (for convenience), any
> relevant written promises from Sun (if any), and any relevant
> written leg
On 6/4/06, Anthony Towns wrote:
For those playing along at home, Mike isn't a Debian developer, doesn't
maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer applicant. He doesn't
even seem to be a regular participant on the debian-legal list.
As a semi-regular on -legal, I can say he is.
--
An
Le dimanche 04 juin 2006 à 17:39 +1000, Anthony Towns a écrit :
> For those playing along at home, Mike isn't a Debian developer, doesn't
> maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer applicant. He doesn't
> even seem to be a regular participant on the debian-legal list.
Despite all of that,
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 05:39:10PM +1000, Anthony Towns
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:18:39AM -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> > Too many excuses. All inadequate.
> >
> > It is past time that the covert actions of the "small cabal"
> > were openly reviewed. The license (for convenience), any
>
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 09:57:40AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> position. Debian's position, as consistently expressed by ftpmaster,
> on this list, and in the press, is that the license is acceptable for
> non-free, and that is also Sun's position.
Just for clarification, a position expressed by
On 6/4/06, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:18:39AM -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> Too many excuses. All inadequate.
>
> It is past time that the covert actions of the "small cabal"
> were openly reviewed. The license (for convenience), any
> relevant written promises from Sun (if an
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:18:16PM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On 6/4/06, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:18:39AM -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> >> Too many excuses. All inadequate.
> >> It is past time that the covert actions of the "small cabal"
> >> were openly reviewed.
Le dimanche 04 juin 2006 à 03:59 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> For those still playing, Olaf also isn't a Debian developer, doesn't
> maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer applicant. He's made
> something like 5 posts to debian-legal, though, which I guess given Andrew
> Donnellan'
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 05:39:10PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:18:39AM -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> > be posted to debian-legal.
>
> For those playing along at home, Mike isn't a Debian developer, doesn't
> maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer applicant. He d
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 09:57:40AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > OTOH, I'd say pull it *now* while distribution is low, then fix the
> > problems, and only *then* get it back in... seems to be the least
> > damaging route to go for, imho.
>
> You can say that if you like, but please be aware tha
Scripsit Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As beautiful as this irony is of a non-developer asserting on a developer
> list that being involved in development is irrelevant,
But being involved in development _is_ irrelevant as regards whether
his arguments have merit or not.
--
Henning Makho
Bill Allombert wrote:
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 09:57:40AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
I see no ground in the Debian constitution to claim this is "Debian's
position". Being the ftp-masters decisision does not make it the
"Debian's position".
As for the relevance of Sun position on Debian d
> Non-freeness is a red herring. The issue is that a "small cabal" -
> - a small cabal operating outside its field of expertise - has
> placed Debian in the position of indemnifying Sun.
And isn't another "small cabal" of freeness junkies, who cannot accept
that it is actually possible to work w
On 6/4/06, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:18:16PM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On 6/4/06, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:18:39AM -0700, Mike Bird wrote:
> >> Too many excuses. All inadequate.
> >> It is past time that the covert ac
Christian Perrier wrote:
>
> And isn't another "small cabal" of freeness junkies, who cannot accept
> that it is actually possible to work with commercial vendors to assist
> them in their way to free software, doing exactly the opposite by
> playing words with legal issues ?
>
Please explain how
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
>
> I guess the conclusion is that being a Debian developer means you're
> right and not being one means you're wrong?
>
More like, being a Debian developer means your arguments are ignored and
not being a Debian developer means your arguments are ignored (for a
complete
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 08:45:11AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> - something it already had (admins who really wanted Sun's Java could
> always go to java.sun.com and install it themselves or use java-package)
Come on; you could say this about almost _every single_ package in the
archive.
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 08:45:11AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>
>> - something it already had (admins who really wanted Sun's Java could
>>always go to java.sun.com and install it themselves or use java-package)
>
>
> Come on; you could say this about almost
Also, I should add that agreeing to a license that commits SPI to
indemnify Sun in certain circumstances should not have happened without
consulting with the board of SPI and SPI's attorney. **Regardless** of
the particular opinion on whether or not this is a legal risk, this
consultation should h
#include
* Olaf van der Spek [Sun, Jun 04 2006, 02:31:00PM]:
> >For those still playing, Olaf also isn't a Debian developer, doesn't
> >maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer applicant. He's made
> >something like 5 posts to debian-legal, though, which I guess given Andrew
> >Donnella
> AT == Anthony Towns [2006-6-4]
AT> For those playing along at home, Mike isn't a Debian developer,
AT> doesn't maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer
AT> applicant. He doesn't even seem to be a regular participant on the
AT> debian-legal list.
So what?
--
Ciao, Davide
--
To
> AT> For those playing along at home, zzz isn't a Debian developer,
> AT> doesn't maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer
> AT> applicant. He doesn't even seem to be a regular participant on the
> AT> debian-legal list.
>
> So what?
I would like to request everyone to think before post
On Sun, 2006-06-04 at 09:57 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I would furthermore strongly encourage people to work *with* Sun towards
> improving the current license
There have been numerous issues with the current text pointed out here
already, I guess people are currently just waiting for the fixe
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 05:39:10PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> For those playing along at home, Mike isn't a Debian developer, doesn't
>> maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer applicant. He doesn't
>> even seem to be a regular participant on
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 08:45:11AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Christian Perrier wrote:
> > And isn't another "small cabal" of freeness junkies, who cannot accept
> > that it is actually possible to work with commercial vendors to assist
> > them in their way to free software, doing exactly
Le dimanche 04 juin 2006 à 08:58 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez a écrit :
> If Larry Ellison shows
> up at the next DebConf can we expect Debian to start distributing Oracle
> as well?
If Oracle allows the project to distribute Oracle with *reasonable*
license terms for non-free, and if someone is will
Le dimanche 04 juin 2006 à 17:50 +0600, Christian Perrier a écrit :
> And isn't another "small cabal" of freeness junkies, who cannot accept
> that it is actually possible to work with commercial vendors to assist
> them in their way to free software, doing exactly the opposite by
> playing words w
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name : app-install-data
Upstream Author : Werner Stille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://frsl06.physik.uni-freiburg.de/privat/stille/kpl/
* License : GPL
Package: kpl
Architecture: any
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends
Hi all,
for those who don't know, nmudiff is a small script by Steinar H.
Gunderson that, when invoked in the source tree of a NMU, will create a
diff with respect the previous version, and send it to the BTS. I've
found it quite useful myself, and probably others have as well.
By default, the cu
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 05:23:33PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> (And while I wait for answers, I'll go dream about the day when dak
> itself will send the diffs to the BTS, if ever.)
Actually, you can implement this outside dak, but I'd hesitate to do this
automatically. How would people feel abo
Adeodato Simó wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi
> for those who don't know, nmudiff is a small script by Steinar H.
> Gunderson that, when invoked in the source tree of a NMU, will create a
> diff with respect the previous version, and send it to the BTS. I've
> found it quite useful myself, and probably other
Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 07:37:21PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
> > > I really hope we can solve the issues in a graceful manner.
> >
> > ...and fast, too. This is urgent while that the package is in the
> > archive with the broken license. I think we shou
Hi, i would like to extrapolate a discussion from the big "Sun Java
available from non-free" thread and comment and listen for comment on
it. In particular, the primary question is: Who can write on debian-devel?
Please, don't consider this a polemic message (except the last part
maybe... ;-) ):
Cesare Leonardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They seems to say: "If you don't write code, you cannot permit to speak
> in debian-devel". Or, that is worse: "If you don't write code you are
> not partecipating in the Debian development".
No. They say "If you are not participating in Debian devel
Hi,
one of my packages hast the lintian warning that the
standards version it uses it newer. Yacpi has standards
version 3.7.2 and at the time of uploading yacpi this
version of the debian-policy was released.
http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/debian-policy.html shows
2006-05-04 as date for debia
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 06:38:40PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> Hi,
> one of my packages hast the lintian warning that the
> standards version it uses it newer. Yacpi has standards
> version 3.7.2 and at the time of uploading yacpi this
> version of the debian-policy was released.
> http://package
Hallo Eduard,
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> #include
> * Jörg Sommer [Sat, May 27 2006, 10:59:39PM]:
>
>> > No, they don't. At least my packages call it only if `uname -r` ==
>> > target version. When you drop the depmod run, and someone installs a new
>> > kernel together with accomp
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Loic Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: gnome-python-desktop
Version : 2.14.0
Upstream Author : Benoît Dejean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Gustavo Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
James Henstridge <[EMA
On May 23, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, does anybody mind if I remove depmod from the module-init-tools init
> script?
So I did it. Since yesterday depmod -A is not run at boot time anymore.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
* Andreas Barth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060510 23:10]:
> we think the switch to gcc 4.1
> as default should only be made if not more than 20 packages become RC
> buggy by it. Also, the switch should happen latest 1.5 months prior to
> freeze, that is Jun 15th.
As we are below the 20 packages co
* Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-04 21:01]:
> As we are below the 20 packages count if bug #366820 is correct (and
> Martin just confirmed the number), it is ok to do the switch now.
> Martin, can you please also mark these bugs as serious now (as
> they're FTBFS then)?
Yes, we have be
Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So, does anybody mind if I remove depmod from the module-init-tools init
>> script?
>So I did it. Since yesterday depmod -A is not run at boot time anymore.
Will the case described in this message (from the postinst for kernel .debs
made by kernel-packag
Matthew Woodcraft wrote:
> Will the case described in this message (from the postinst for kernel .debs
> made by kernel-package) still work ok?
No, the majority of kernel module packages are now broken. Might be a
few days until I can get around to fixing dh_installmodules (#301424).
BTW, if a ma
reassign 366820 gcc-defaults
thanks
Let's switch to 4.1 when a fixed 4.1.1 is in the archive.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 366820 gcc-defaults
Bug#366820: Transition to GCC 4.1 for etch
Bug reassigned from package `general' to `gcc-defaults'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(ad
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 09:17:30PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> I found one serious bug in 4.1.1 though (#370308) which needs to be
> fixed before 4.1 can be the default (since it produces a bogus error
> on some Perl headers which get included by many packages). Matthias
> is aware of this an
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 08:45:11AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>
>>Christian Perrier wrote:
>>
>>>And isn't another "small cabal" of freeness junkies, who cannot accept
>>>that it is actually possible to work with commercial vendors to assist
>>>them in their way to f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Cesare Leonardi wrote:
> Hi, i would like to extrapolate a discussion from the big "Sun Java
> available from non-free" thread and comment and listen for comment on
> it. In particular, the primary question is: Who can write on debian-devel?
> Please,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 08:45:11AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>>
>>> Christian Perrier wrote:
>>>
[snip]
> All good points. However, I think that much of the "popular" press (in
> the sense o
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 04:28:18PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> All good points. However, I think that much of the "popular" press (in
> the sense of popular geek press) is not making the distinction between
> Debian proper and Debian non-free. Some have, but others have not.
> Headlines li
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 04:52:22PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > - something it already had (admins who really wanted Sun's Java could
> > always go to java.sun.com and install it themselves or use java-package)
>
> Well, see, *this* is not true. Sure, it's possible to install Java on a
> De
Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
Errr... apt-get says:
Failed to fetch http://security.debian.org/dists/etch/updates/Release
Unable to find expected entry main/binary-amd64/Packages in
Meta-index file (malformed Release file?)
And, indeed, despite appearing in Architectures, there is no
bin
On 6/4/06, Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
#include
* Olaf van der Spek [Sun, Jun 04 2006, 02:31:00PM]:
> >For those still playing, Olaf also isn't a Debian developer, doesn't
> >maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer applicant. He's made
> >something like 5 posts to debian-
And which part of the message you quote as an example is the inappropriate one?
AT> For those playing along at home, zzz isn't a Debian developer,
AT> doesn't maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer
AT> applicant. He doesn't even seem to be a regular participant on the
AT> debian-legal
Cesare Leonardi wrote:
> In particular, the primary question is: Who can write on debian-devel?
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/
Discussion about technical development topics. (High-volume mailing
list.)
This list is not moderated; posting is allowed by anyone.
(I would add: Anyone who know
su, 2006-05-28 kello 18:40 -0500, Andrew McMillan kirjoitti:
> (a) Order the list of keysigning participants by centrality.
It might be interesting to compare the optimal grouping of people to a
random one, using the "matrix" style of keysigning party I proposed
after the Debconf5 one. See [1] for
Daniel Kobras wrote:
> Method B
>
> Package: oldpkg
> Depends: newpkg
> Files:
> /usr/share/doc/oldpkg -> /usr/share/doc/newpkg
> (and nothing else)
Does not this hit another bug in dpkg ?
It seems that empty old directories cannot be replaced by a
symlink without special pre/post
Hi,
After Marga's talk in Debconf6, I've been working in a program that starts the
initscripts in parallel [1]. It's similar in some aspects to startpar (part
of sysvinit package) but with two main goals: it must work, it must be as
little intrusive as possible (in respect to the scripts behavi
also sprach Maximiliano Curia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.05.0039 +0200]:
> It's not ready to be released, nor to be included in Debian, but
> I would really like to have some eyes over it, some comments and
> suggestions.
Even though debian-devel is not the wrong place, you do want to
check out
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 03:30:49PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 05:39:10PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >> For those playing along at home, Mike isn't a Debian developer, doesn't
> >> maintain any packages, and isn't a new-main
Hi,
> By default, the current version of nmudiff opens a new bug against the
> package and attaches the diff to it. I recently submitted wishlist
> #370056 against devscripts so nmudiff behaves like this only if --new is
> passed, and by default sends the patch to the bugs the NMU fixes.
I don't
also sprach Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.05.0036 +0200]:
> I don't think there is much harm in opening a new NMU bug.
Isn't an NMU by definition bound to an existing bug? Or at least
should be? So then I'd say that nmudiff should *never* open a new
bug.
--
Please do not send copie
* Junichi Uekawa [Mon, 05 Jun 2006 07:36:43 +0900]:
> I don't think there is much harm in opening a new NMU bug.
No, there isn't. Plus has been the right way for years, AIUI, and
dev-ref explicitly mentions it.
> How about taking a command-line option so that it will add to the
> bugreport when
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> His message was polite, and didn't seem like a demand (despite the use
> of the word "cabal").
The "Too many excuses. All inadequate" bit was polite?
> His request was quite reasonable, and I heartily agree with it.
>
> His message also was much more th
Scripsit Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * Junichi Uekawa [Mon, 05 Jun 2006 07:36:43 +0900]:
>> I don't think there is much harm in opening a new NMU bug.
> No, there isn't. Plus has been the right way for years, AIUI, and
> dev-ref explicitly mentions it.
How is it righter than sending the
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 11:02:59PM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> Please RTFM [1], Blackdown has been distributing java packages for Debian
> through their own APT repositories and mirror network for quite some time.
> For example check this:
>
> # Blackdown Java
> deb ftp://ftp.gw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dimanche 04 juin 2006 à 03:59 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
>> For those still playing, Olaf also isn't a Debian developer, doesn't
>> maintain any packages, and isn't a new-maintainer applicant. He's made
>> something l
Le dimanche 04 juin 2006 à 22:48 +0200, Wouter Verhelst a écrit :
> Is the "popular press" ever right on Debian-related matters? No. Should
> we care? No.
Why shouldn't we care? Debian suffers from its image and this has been a
known problem for years, and we shouldn't care?
--
.''`. J
Le lundi 05 juin 2006 à 06:23 +0100, Carlos Correia a écrit :
> > How about stopping the discussions about who is a developer or not, who
> > has the right to discuss or not, and sticking to the facts?
>
> What a big troll you are...
>
> - From all your posts, there is only one thing we got to kn
70 matches
Mail list logo
