With the upload of debian-maintainers version 1.51, the following
changes to the keyring have been made:
dm:tiago...@safernet.org.br
Full name: Tiago Bortoletto Vaz
Added key: C42623B760FA5999693F0782690D6214A504FECA
A summary of all the changes in this upload follows.
Debian distributio
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:18:01PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think these have the same flaw as our current situation: none of them
> state who interprets the Social Contract and the DSFG if there is a
> dispute over what they mean.
If there is a dispute in Debian, there are three levels at
> On Fri Dec 19 21:10, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > ,[ The social contract is binding but may be overridden by a simple
> > > GR ]
> > > | This amends the proposal above, and replaces the text of the proposal
> > > | with: The developers, via a general resolution, determine that the
> > > | s
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 09:10:25PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > ,[ The social contract is a goal, not a binding contract ]
> > | This amends the proposal above, and replaces the text of the proposal
> > | with: The developers, via a general resolution, determine that the
> > | social cont
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I like the idea of clarifying what the principles of the project
> actually are, since, as aj said, all the decisions about lenny would
> fall out from the position the project take about the foundation
On Fri, Dec 19 2008, Luk Claes wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I like the idea of clarifying what the principles of the project
>> actually are, since, as aj said, all the decisions about lenny would
>> fall out from the position the project take about the foundation
>> d
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I like the idea of clarifying what the principles of the project
> actually are, since, as aj said, all the decisions about lenny would
> fall out from the position the project take about the foundation
> documents. While I have always thought that "fou
Manoj Srivastava writes:
> I think we will keep coming back to this biennial spate of
> disagreement we have, as we determine whether or not we can release
> with firmware blobs or what have you. This also would help developers,
> the ftp-masters, and the release team with a clear cut
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:18:01PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> If we're going to have a vote on this topic, I feel quite strongly that
> every option which states the social contract is binding should include in
> it a constitutional amendment specifying *who* decides for the project
> what those
Manoj Srivastava writes:
> I do ont think that determining who interprets the
> non-constitution foundation documents belongs on the same ballot.
That seems entirely reasonable to me, and I agree on the undesireability
of combinatorial explosion of the ballot.
> It is a flaw in the co
On Fri Dec 19 21:10, Robert Millan wrote:
> > ,[ The social contract is binding but may be overridden by a simple GR ]
> > | This amends the proposal above, and replaces the text of the proposal
> > | with: The developers, via a general resolution, determine that the
> > | social contract sh
[ ] The Social contract is a binding contract, DPL interprets
[ ] The Social contract is a binding contract, secretary interprets
[ ] The Social contract is a binding contract, tech ctte interprets
[ ] The Social contract is a binding contract, individuals interpret
[ ] The Social contrac
On Fri, Dec 19 2008, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava writes:
>
>> I think we will keep coming back to this biennial spate of
>> disagreement we have, as we determine whether or not we can release
>> with firmware blobs or what have you. This also would help developers,
>> the ft
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 01:38:33PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> ,[ The Social contract is a binding contract ]
> | The developers, via a general resolution, determine that the social
> | contract should apply to everything Debian does, now and in the future;
> | _AND_ the social contract
Hi,
I like the idea of clarifying what the principles of the project
actually are, since, as aj said, all the decisions about lenny would
fall out from the position the project take about the foundation
documents. While I have always thought that "foundation" implied the
proposal belo
15 matches
Mail list logo
