http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors-9808/msg00015.html
Hello!
We are sorry, but we changed our old "monitorsolution.com", and
"heartforyou.com" links and replaced them by:
bestnetplace.com (which group all monitors activities/related links)
You actualy have a link to us (thanks again) on your
> It looks like it is just making explicit the restrictions which already exist
> in law (whatever those might be), and is not part of the license per se.
That seems to be the case, but I'm not entirely sure. This appears to
be a standard disclaimer that gets attached to many licenses. A Google
It looks like it is just making explicit the restrictions which already exist
in law (whatever those might be), and is not part of the license per se.
-brad
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 08:29:22PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> Ok, thanks for the help... problem #2:
>
> there's a README in the document
> It looks like it is just making explicit the restrictions which already exist
> in law (whatever those might be), and is not part of the license per se.
That seems to be the case, but I'm not entirely sure. This appears to
be a standard disclaimer that gets attached to many licenses. A Google
Ok, thanks for the help... problem #2:
there's a README in the documentation has a standard warranty
disclaimer, but then it has this text:
US Government Users Restricted Rights
Use, duplication, or disclosure by the Government is subject to
restrictions set forth in FAR 52.227.19(c)(2) or subpa
It looks like it is just making explicit the restrictions which already exist
in law (whatever those might be), and is not part of the license per se.
-brad
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 08:29:22PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> Ok, thanks for the help... problem #2:
>
> there's a README in the documen
Hello,
I have already packaged
PARI/GP Number Theory-oriented Computer Algebra System.
It consists of a C library, libpari, and of the
programmable interactive GP calculator.
License is GPL. Home page at http://www.parigp-home.de/
I filled ITP #79621.
My source package is av
Ok, thanks for the help... problem #2:
there's a README in the documentation has a standard warranty
disclaimer, but then it has this text:
US Government Users Restricted Rights
Use, duplication, or disclosure by the Government is subject to
restrictions set forth in FAR 52.227.19(c)(2) or subp
Hello,
I have already packaged
PARI/GP Number Theory-oriented Computer Algebra System.
It consists of a C library, libpari, and of the
programmable interactive GP calculator.
License is GPL. Home page at http://www.parigp-home.de/
I filled ITP #79621.
My source package is a
On Thu, 03 May 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I posted an ITP: ardour -- a Linux Digital Audio Workstation (bug #95870).
> Sadly enough, upstream author doesn't seem to agree on me doing this.
> What can you advice me to do ? Should I try to convince him ? Or package it
> anyway ?
You could off
I've exchanged email with Paul Davis many many times. He's a reasonable
guy. He won't prevent you from packaging it, but I wouldn't package
it at this time if I were you.
Being included in a distribution opens the package up to a wider audience.
If the project is still immature this can be a ba
I posted an ITP: ardour -- a Linux Digital Audio Workstation (bug #95870).
Sadly enough, upstream author doesn't seem to agree on me doing this.
What can you advice me to do ? Should I try to convince him ? Or package it
anyway ?
As the code is GPL'd, that's to say "freely redistributable", the
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> A lot of packages used to test for root access in the clean target too.
> That was standard practise before we had fakeroot.
>
> I suppose when you were building as root (non-fake), you would end up
> with directories owned by root, so it made sense that you would need
> ro
Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> I wonder how strict is the "about 50 characters or so" limitation on the
> short description for a debconf template is?
Well, you're not going to get a "serious" severity bug about it any time
soon.
However, debconf frontends are designed with strings of about this
le
<- snip ->
> Hi,
> I have looked at this. Despite my reservations about the
> usefulness
> of a tic-tac-toe game, I tried to have an open mind about it.
> I can't say that in my opinion this is actually worth bothering
> to
> package, it is pretty simplistic to say the least.
You g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 03 May 2001 5:37 pm, G . Gabriele wrote:
[Snip]
>
> The package is at http://nettoe.sourceforge.net
>
> It's a console based Tic-Tac-Toe like game playable
> over a network . (tcp/ip)
>
> Now the last version is 1.0.5 and it's a stable ver
On Thu, 03 May 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I posted an ITP: ardour -- a Linux Digital Audio Workstation (bug #95870).
> Sadly enough, upstream author doesn't seem to agree on me doing this.
> What can you advice me to do ? Should I try to convince him ? Or package it
> anyway ?
You could of
I've exchanged email with Paul Davis many many times. He's a reasonable
guy. He won't prevent you from packaging it, but I wouldn't package
it at this time if I were you.
Being included in a distribution opens the package up to a wider audience.
If the project is still immature this can be a b
> Some of them are kinda redundant with packages in Debian already, such as
> my maintenance of VFTP, a secure FTP server based off of OpenBSDFTP. I was
> just wondering if that's cool, or if the redundancy is stupid...
If it's another packaging of something else that's already packaged, we
don't
I posted an ITP: ardour -- a Linux Digital Audio Workstation (bug #95870).
Sadly enough, upstream author doesn't seem to agree on me doing this.
What can you advice me to do ? Should I try to convince him ? Or package it
anyway ?
As the code is GPL'd, that's to say "freely redistributable", th
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> A lot of packages used to test for root access in the clean target too.
> That was standard practise before we had fakeroot.
>
> I suppose when you were building as root (non-fake), you would end up
> with directories owned by root, so it made sense that you would need
> r
Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> I wonder how strict is the "about 50 characters or so" limitation on the
> short description for a debconf template is?
Well, you're not going to get a "serious" severity bug about it any time
soon.
However, debconf frontends are designed with strings of about this
l
<- snip ->
> Hi,
> I have looked at this. Despite my reservations about the
> usefulness
> of a tic-tac-toe game, I tried to have an open mind about it.
> I can't say that in my opinion this is actually worth bothering
> to
> package, it is pretty simplistic to say the least.
You
> Unfortunately, it's not that uncommon, although that is a bit long.
At this rate, it'll take less time to develop stage four cancer, get
treatment, and recover, than it took to become a Debian Developer ;-)
I should submit that to the webpage folks so they can put that catchy
phrase on the NM p
<-- snip -->
>
> I missed the request, what package was it you wanted? What kind
> of state is it in, i.e. is it stable, under heavy development,
> or somewhere in between?
>
> Jim
The package is at http://nettoe.sourceforge.net
It's a console based Tic-Tac-Toe like game playable
over a netw
> Hi, I'm just wondering if someone can find out for me what else I need to
> do to get through the DAM approval phase; eg, what the holdup is. I hate
> even to be asking this question since I'm sure the DAM folks are busy with
> other things than just approving folks in queue, and I'm aware they'r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 03 May 2001 5:37 pm, G . Gabriele wrote:
[Snip]
>
> The package is at http://nettoe.sourceforge.net
>
> It's a console based Tic-Tac-Toe like game playable
> over a network . (tcp/ip)
>
> Now the last version is 1.0.5 and it's a stable ve
Hi, I'm just wondering if someone can find out for me what else I need to
do to get through the DAM approval phase; eg, what the holdup is. I hate
even to be asking this question since I'm sure the DAM folks are busy with
other things than just approving folks in queue, and I'm aware they're
volunt
> Doh a couple of months
>
> As almost all developers are (I must have read about that somewhere...)
> I'm lazy and I think the steps to become a Debian developer
> are a little "tedious".
This is on purpose. Not everyone should be a developer.
> I give up as a developer :-)
>
> What sho
On Thu, 03 May 2001 16:22:38 Christian Surchi wrote:
> On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:31:28PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > We have about 700 developers, with quite a few in Italy, I think.
> >
> > http://www.debian.org/devel/developers.loc
> >
> > I'm sure you can find someone.
>
> Right!
< -- snip -->
> > I have read that I have to meet a developer... and so on
> > but I'm italian and I think that would be a little difficult.
> > I don't think there are many italian developers out there :-(
>
> We have about 700 developers, with quite a few in Italy, I think.
>
> http://www.debi
> Some of them are kinda redundant with packages in Debian already, such as
> my maintenance of VFTP, a secure FTP server based off of OpenBSDFTP. I was
> just wondering if that's cool, or if the redundancy is stupid...
If it's another packaging of something else that's already packaged, we
don't
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:31:28PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We have about 700 developers, with quite a few in Italy, I think.
>
> http://www.debian.org/devel/developers.loc
>
> I'm sure you can find someone.
Right! :)
Maybe he could specify his position in Italy.
--
Christian Surchi
> Unfortunately, it's not that uncommon, although that is a bit long.
At this rate, it'll take less time to develop stage four cancer, get
treatment, and recover, than it took to become a Debian Developer ;-)
I should submit that to the webpage folks so they can put that catchy
phrase on the NM
<-- snip -->
>
> I missed the request, what package was it you wanted? What kind
> of state is it in, i.e. is it stable, under heavy development,
> or somewhere in between?
>
> Jim
The package is at http://nettoe.sourceforge.net
It's a console based Tic-Tac-Toe like game playable
over a net
> Hi, I'm just wondering if someone can find out for me what else I need to
> do to get through the DAM approval phase; eg, what the holdup is. I hate
> even to be asking this question since I'm sure the DAM folks are busy with
> other things than just approving folks in queue, and I'm aware they'
> Doh a couple of months
>
> As almost all developers are (I must have read about that somewhere...)
> I'm lazy and I think the steps to become a Debian developer
> are a little "tedious".
This is on purpose. Not everyone should be a developer.
> I give up as a developer :-)
>
> What sh
Hi, I'm just wondering if someone can find out for me what else I need to
do to get through the DAM approval phase; eg, what the holdup is. I hate
even to be asking this question since I'm sure the DAM folks are busy with
other things than just approving folks in queue, and I'm aware they're
volun
On Thu, 03 May 2001 16:22:38 Christian Surchi wrote:
> On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:31:28PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > We have about 700 developers, with quite a few in Italy, I think.
> >
> > http://www.debian.org/devel/developers.loc
> >
> > I'm sure you can find someone.
>
> Right
< -- snip -->
> > I have read that I have to meet a developer... and so on
> > but I'm italian and I think that would be a little difficult.
> > I don't think there are many italian developers out there :-(
>
> We have about 700 developers, with quite a few in Italy, I think.
>
> http://www.deb
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:31:28PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We have about 700 developers, with quite a few in Italy, I think.
>
> http://www.debian.org/devel/developers.loc
>
> I'm sure you can find someone.
Right! :)
Maybe he could specify his position in Italy.
--
Christian Surch
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 11:00:55PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> i'd like to package the opengl manpages... but there tarballs are a bit
> strange... they're .Z files to begin with, and they don't appear to have
> a version number (some other docs have 1.2 as a version, so i suppose i
> can assume t
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 11:00:55PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> i'd like to package the opengl manpages... but there tarballs are a bit
> strange... they're .Z files to begin with, and they don't appear to have
> a version number (some other docs have 1.2 as a version, so i suppose i
> can assume
43 matches
Mail list logo
