On Sat, 26 Jun 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Saturday 26 June 2010, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > My own opinion is that we've done this backwards, and that everything
> > on -private modulo vacation messages and posts explicitely marked with
> > a header indicating that they shouldn't be declassified sho
On Saturday 26 June 2010, Don Armstrong wrote:
> My own opinion is that we've done this backwards, and that everything
> on -private modulo vacation messages and posts explicitely marked with
> a header indicating that they shouldn't be declassified should be
> declassified automatically after thre
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 03:20:14PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote [edited]:
> My own opinion is that we've done this backwards, and that everything
> on -private modulo vacation messages and posts explicitely marked with
> a header indicating that they shouldn't be declassified should be
> declassified
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
> I would welcome a new GR to rescind the previous one and revert
> d-private to what it's always been: private. That way we can stop
> worrying about the whole issue and we will no longer run the risk of
> making things public that their authors do not want to
[Andreas Tille]
> I do not want to stop any volunteer to do the work. I just doubt
> there will be anybody.
In other words,
1. You think declassification is not worth anyone's time
2. You are not volunteering to do it
3. You don't want to stop other people from volunteering to do
On 25/06/2010 07:43 μμ, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I would welcome a new GR to rescind the previous one and revert
>> d-private to what it's always been: private. That way we can stop
>> worrying about the whole issue and we will no longer run the risk of
>> making things public that their authors do n
Hi
Here is an overview of the most important financial flows of money hold
on Debian's behalf this year up to May 31st.
January:
SPI [0] (in USD):
* donations:+ 9,849.73
* freight: - 3,372.66
* hard drives: - 1,138.35
* processing fees: -
Frans Pop writes:
> I would welcome a new GR to rescind the previous one and revert
> d-private to what it's always been: private. That way we can stop
> worrying about the whole issue and we will no longer run the risk of
> making things public that their authors do not want to be made public.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 01:59:53PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> The vote is there and we cannot change the past;
I do not want to change the past.
> the vote gives a
> process (as Bernhard observed in a different post) and shows our
> willingness to be transparent. Are you proposing to stat
On Friday 25 June 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand against *what* exactly you're arguing; nor it
> is clear to me whether you are proposing a different course of action
> than the status quo.
>
> The vote is there and we cannot change the past [...]
I would welcome a new
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 01:19:42PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I clearly remember that vote. But how much sense does this vote make if
> nobody does the actual work? Voting about a decision is cheap, but
> doing the work is not. Normally you vote between comparable options.
> We voted between
* Stefano Zacchiroli [100625 12:57]:
> Apparently ATM we don't have the energy to do that. That is just fine:
> we are all volunteers and we cannot be forced to do specific stuff.
> Still, we need to show our honesty, clarify our willingness to implement
> our decision, and make clear the needed c
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:57:06PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> But this
> is not the point here: the point is rather that we had a vote on the
> matter, we decided as a project that such archives shall be
> declassified. Now it's time to keep up with what we promised.
I clearly remember tha
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:36:24AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I have the gut feeling that this declassification issue is some kind of
> RFP bug which nobody really wants to pick. If you ask me if I would
> prefer people working on fixing RC bugs or rather reading piles of old
> mails to decide
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 09:58:23AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
> Status update on this. We got some volunteers, but no one with actually
> enough free time to start doing the declassification right now. In fact,
I have the gut feeling that this declassification issue is some kind of
RFP bu
On 25/06/2010 10:52, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> As usual in Debian - which is a community effort mostly - you can get a
> release
> quicker or longer security support for a release, if you pay somebody to do
> so.
> There are several companies and consultants who employ/are Debian developers
> and
>
On 06/23/2010 07:22 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
> The reason why I ask is because we have a hardware appliance that is based on
> Debian and we are working on upgrading to version 5. Because the previous
> version is not longer supported, we need to provide a patch policy for our
> appliance.
If yo
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 05:06:12PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I've been reminded [1] that we're still pending implementation of the
> General Resolution entitled "Declassification of debian-private list
> archives" [2].
> If you are interested please mail with your declaration of
> intere
18 matches
Mail list logo
