nly use it in scenarios where you would be willing to use
pam_console.
(Why somebody bothered to implement resmgr instead of simply enhancing
pam_console is beyond me; probably NIH)
--
.''`. ** Debian G
cess someplace. Quite ironically, the
solutions to the problems they cite for pam_console are exactly the
same as the solutions they implemented for resmgr. Hence I figure it
was probably NIH.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
an are
guaranteed to always have conflicting results. No matter what your
position on an issue, somebody in the project disagrees with you.
Get over it.
The only genuinely neutral content is the output of /dev/random; all
else is subjective.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | An
only the tools provided on a
Debian CD is a total moron. You might as well complain that the
internet is bad, just because it's primarily used as a vehicle for
delivering porn.
[And that's without even starting on this insane notion that trying to
stop kids from seeing porn is someho
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 11:47:47PM +, Will Newton wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 Dec 2004 22:15, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> > Anybody who can't obtain porn using only the tools provided on a
> > Debian CD is a total moron. You might as well complain that the
> > inter
east get it right.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
; '(debTimeStamp>$lasttime)'. this would make keeping debian up to
> date over dialup a much easier experience i imagine.
Or you could just use something like rsync.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
t; in?
>
> Well, you would need to check the penal codes of each individual state
> wherein such a minor resides;
[...]
> I don't
> know how this applies to offenders from the UK.
We tell them to fuck off.
--
.'
here is only absence of action from some parties.
Just because you elect not to engage in an action doesn't mean you can
claim that nobody else should engage in that action. Not even under
some misguided notion of "equality".
If somebody was saying &q
ight. If it's necessary for one thing then it's
necessary for everything.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 07:14:07PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> >Oh come on, they're at far greater risk from our overly-permissive
> >approach to copyright and patent issues.
> >
> The copyright and patent problems faced by Debian are i
On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 11:51:29PM -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> * License : Free for non-commercial use
>
> Subject to license verification (DFSG compliant):
Non-commercial-use-only licenses are non-free.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suf
roducing censorship in order to not 'hurt
their feelings' to be morally repugnant. It has been proven endless
times that once you start doing this, you can't stop. For any package,
there is going to be some minority group that is offended by it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
be exploited.
Precisely. If we tolerate the intolerance of these people who are so
terrified of images of the naked female form, then they will continue
to exploit our tolerance.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
iven
> package is NOT censorship.
And telling somebody else that they can't distribute a given package
IS censorship.
You evidently have chosen not to do it. That's not censorship. You're
presumably also trying to tell somebody else not to do it. That's
censorship.
--
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 03:55:27PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > [...] freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential
> > foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions
> > for its
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 12:21:04PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 05-Dec-04, 09:07 (CST), Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:45:56AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > > On 05-Dec-04, 04:55 (CST), James Foster &
th
> its expected implementation.
There's only one way this ever goes. Any student of history should be
familiar with how this plays out.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Debian works. You do the
stuff you're interested in (frequently without mentioning it to
anybody else, in some cases).
Your Chicken Little act is not impressing anybody.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
transliterated field should be called 'Maintainer'. If you want
some other freaky encoding, unsupported by the older tools, put it in
a new field. Using the old field just breaks stuff for no reason.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffi
you share interests with, then you really need to
emigrate or revolt. Mine doesn't.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:33:54PM -0500, Josh Metzler wrote:
> On Sunday 05 December 2004 08:25 pm, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 12:21:04PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > > On 05-Dec-04, 09:07 (CST), Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
At least in .au we have some legislation to protect minority
> groups but we're not living in a totalitarian PC clampdown.
Sounds irrelevant. There's a big difference between 'protect minority
groups' (from what?) and 'compel everybody to behave in a
in the context that Bruce's "history" is
comprised of the immortal words "Fuck you all" and the deletion of our
mailing list archives. Then it makes more sense.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
not seriously applied. It's there to cover
the University in the case of a lawsuit, and to allow them to
selectively apply it to people they want to get rid of (just about
anybody can be effectively accused of violating the policy; it's
almost impossible to go through the day without doi
own actions.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
hile censorship is a choice made by an otherwise unrelated
person in the same organisation.
Editing would be if the maintainer decided to remove the
package. Censorship is when some other developer tries to force him.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
that in certain
> contexts compels people to behave in a manner approved of by minority
> groups, and yet we're not living in a totalitarian PC clampdown.
Yet.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 09:25:31PM +0100, Andrea Bedini wrote:
> Il giorno lun, 06-12-2004 alle 01:49 +0000, Andrew Suffield ha scritto:
> > Word games. Censorship is when a citizen of one body chooses to have
> > that body distribute something (by being a citizen and distributi
sible to think a package like hot-babe
> is a bad idea without wanting to be set up as a censor for all ideas they
> disagree with.
However, it's extremely unlikely that it is possible to ban it for
that reason without going down that path. There's a significant
difference between
ng. Commercial publishers run into this
problem all the time and often decide it's safer not to bother]
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
sing a 'core' chunk early before there are any
applications to run on it?)
(c) Stuff that we've tried before and abandoned (like freezing
unstable)
(d) Stuff that isn't related to making releases faster
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
instead. Should be a trivial addition of a
conditional somewhere.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
7;s not their fault if the
software doesn't work, or indeed completely fails to be inside the
expensive box when you open it).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
l world. Free software is here.
We'll do it again if we have to. They can open their specifications or
we'll fucking implement around them and eventually drive them out of
the market.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | A
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 11:07:35AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> It will take fund-raising to do it.
Bullshit. There goes that "free software is impossible" argument
again.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :&#x
nity to make widely desireable
chips with zero royalty costs.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 03:57:19PM -0500, Brendan wrote:
> On Monday 13 December 2004 14:50, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 11:21:54AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > > My surmise is that we'd need an effort like that, raising $250K, to
> > &
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 08:43:37AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 07:50:02PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 11:21:54AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > > My surmise is that we'd need an effort like that, raising $250K, to
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 02:13:53PM -0600, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 07:50:02PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 11:21:54AM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > > My surmise is that we'd need an effort like that, raising $250K, to
''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
) and requires various pieces of test equipment (the
> purchase of which would also be a capital expense). One way or another,
> someone will have to bear these expenses.
And they say that about software too.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
tatement was of the form "Here is how we do it,
and our way is the only way in which it is possible to do it". And
we've heard that one before.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
don't have that excuse.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ot more
> > time-effective, mail for mail, than trying to teach people how to use their
> > MUA.)
>
> Mail-Followup-To is not part of any of the standards defining e-mail
> protocols.
Which just goes to show how useless and irrelevant these purported
"standards&qu
decoders.
Encoders only, not decoders. Decoders for anything probably cannot be
patented.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 01:56:43PM +0100, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:06:53PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > > Is only MPEG Layer III patent encumbered ?
> > > > How about the other MPEG stuff ?
> > > > I find it har
Those are the patents for the transport mechanisms. Still not the decoders.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 04:03:37PM +, Will Newton wrote:
> On Saturday 08 Jan 2005 15:46, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> > > And every set top box manufacturer pays for their MPEG-2 (or MPEG-4)
> > > licenses.
> >
> > Those are the patents for the transpor
t having write access to any media that's not marked noexec?
>
> But I agree that the security benefits are trivial on a system where
> users have access to perl.
Or bash, that's enough to do it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :'
you could have done that yourself and saved us all the time
of a couple of mails.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
#x27;s a real problem that we've been facing for quite some
time now.
Action based on rational evaluation of the consequences *only*, please.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ated file in place; no file is better than a
mangled file).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
o, not really. It's slow and doesn't present any views
on the information that are particularly useful and it's completely
immune to shell scripting. A web interface would appear to be the
wrong way to do this.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
(I've hacked the code.)
Unfortunately apt breaks the code. If you use dpkg directly it'll
work. If you use apt it'll pick a random and unpredictable starting
point.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** |
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 09:49:41PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On 20050228T164806+0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Unfortunately apt breaks the code. If you use dpkg directly it'll
> > work. If you use apt it'll pick a random and unpredictable starting
&g
hy random people should not be writing licenses.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ople ever object to 'pr0n' in the first place :P
But since those would exclude so much of the archive already, they
really can't be allowed as criteria.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Trust is a 3-ary function of the form:
trust :: Person -> Task -> Scenario -> Boolean
And is defined as:
trust p t s = (need_to_trust p t s) && (willing_to_trust p t s)
It is not this, as you so absurdly clai
gt;
> Since when is a message that is on topic (or at least relevant) to
> Debian development spam?
Everything on -devel is spam these days, didn't you get the memo?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux
rts
> of the world.
I wish we could get it that cheap for my day job. What we have to pay
to get useful bandwidth has more zeros in it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`-
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 09:56:27AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On 12/19/05, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:27:36PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > * Steinar H. Gunderson:
> > >
> > >
redit.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
g every *change* to a
given component to go through a single individual. Large projects need
a pumpking, because dogpiling creates lousy software. For Debian this
would be cumbersome and unwieldy as a rule, but some high-importance
tasks could benefit from it.
--
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 10:43:34AM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 08:38 +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On the other hand, I think there might be some benefit to requiring
> > that the Maintainer field must always denote one single Debian
> > develo
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 02:31:19PM -0500, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> >On the other hand, I think there might be some benefit to requiring
> >that the Maintainer field must always denote one single Debian
> >developer, who would be the "
problem at hand is exactly that /dev/hdX won't
> necessarily be stable anymore.
>
> (and, once more, and much worse: network interfaces need a solution to the
> same problem...)
nameif, ifrename - really, this problem has been solved so many times
that it's just not funny a
ld one expires should be safe at present. That's a conservative
estimate. To defend against ancillary attacks (like somebody grabbing
a copy of the key from ftp-master) you need to know how probable they
are, and reduce these figures accordingly.
--
.''`. ** Deb
ces
don't scale to the level at which we have to work *all the time*. Just
ask the BTS admins what happens when somebody scans
http://bugs.debian.org/ to collect data.
Oh, and hey - when SuSE are doing better than you at publishing the
tools they use, it's a hint that maybe you suck.
d possibly be right, but you never know
without reading the thing...
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 07:49:33PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 09:02:09AM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> > On Sunday 08 January 2006 07:27, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 03:19:42PM -0500, Frans Jessop wrote:
> > > >
SARS thing, and avian flu, and all that?
And I want a pony.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 11:44:57AM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> On Sunday 08 January 2006 10:39, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 07:49:33PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 09:02:09AM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> > > >
er than you) actually cares what method
such users use, so long as it does not affect us.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
d to all these years.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
re complicated than that, they means they're
getting worried that they won't like the
truth. People as things, that's where it
starts."
Mightily Oats: "Oh,
ta>
> etc...
I shall upload some of Manoj's pornography immediately.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ty in his actions, and probably less actual
insult.
Dishonesty is *not* an equivalent substitute for respect. If you're
being nice to somebody even though you don't like them, that doesn't
make you a better person, it just makes you a l
the distinction between Canonical and any other
company is pretty much nothing - except for their continual, offensive
PR effort claiming otherwise.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related companies
Have you ever actually subscribed to any Debian mailing lists?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' :
first
place.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
? Is it an unecessary fork? Or is it
> not contributing back its changes to debian software?
I think it's the pretending that pisses people off.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07:43AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> > > I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related companies
&
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 09:49:25AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 15:41 +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:43:16PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > Manners/politeness is social lubricant. It makes society run
> > >
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:56:35PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07:43AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> > > On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:25:01PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:56:35PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> > > On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
s also wrong.
I don't think it's any real surprise that people dislike this sort of
behaviour.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:41:16PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 11:09:12PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Let's take this one apart and see what it is that pisses people off so
> > much.
>
> I don't intend to participate in this type o
etric that complains about any other packages
(I've tried two or three times to invent one).
Sure, you could just manually exclude those few big offenders, but if
you're going to do that then what's th
On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 05:31:40PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 1/12/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:41:16PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 11:09:12PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > >
ast two ways to accomplish this.
If they fail to contribute in a meaningful way, it just means more
work for them (in trying to maintain a diverging fork). Hence, that's
their problem. It's not really a problem for us.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/L
at*, there's ways to derive the metric in an
automated fashion.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 03:11:58PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Well it's nice in theory. The problem is that you have to set the
> > threshold high enough to exempt glibc and dpkg, and when you do that,
> > I have not yet found a metric that
m part of the "Debian world"?
Intuitively, I would not expect any standard to classify any of the
current derivatives as 'part of the Debian world'. We have very little
interaction with any of them.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' :
etter cooperation so that WE can fill the
> gap by taking part of their work.
Did you really just say "we should cooperate better so that we can do
Ubuntu's work for them"? The arrogance of such a statement is only
surpass
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/ |
`. `' |
`- -><-
On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 05:55:14PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jan 2006, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > That's simply wrong given the many people who use both and who cares about
> > > both.
> >
> > By this reasoning, Windows is 'part
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 w
anything wrong other than holding opinions you don't agree with, and
you certainly can't put any evidence behind that 'detrimental to the
project' claim, but *you* are pursuing a personal vendetta. Agai
like you missed the point of that mail, despite
quoting it. What did you think the point was? Alternatively, what do
you think is the correct mailing list for contacting (all of) the
developers about appropriate use of d-d-a?
--
.'
1 - 100 of 383 matches
Mail list logo
