* Vincent Bernat:
> Because without uniformity, we make it harder for people to contribute.
> I have already mentioned Fedora that provides everything in git with CI
> enabled, ability to contribute with pull requests, but that's far the
> only proponent.
Fedora still uses VCS-in-VCS, so it's not
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 12:23:42PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Since use of a public VCS isn't universal among free software projects,
> the implication is that one could take a non-free upstream tarball, dump
> it into git on salsa and magically make it free. I think this is a
> ridiculous co
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 09:20:07AM -0400, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 09:01:34PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > (Or, heretic voice, maybe because it is easier to
> > throw people out when everything is standardized?)
>
> Norbert, it's not the first time in recent emai
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 02:00:52AM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> There were other points I disliked or disagreed but as said the mail was
> too long and the current noise level at DebConf is unbearable, so I
> don't remember.
apropos not remembering: I very much *agree* with most of the AH/DAM/DPL
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 8:56 PM Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 01:35:59AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > tl;dr: Shall we standardize on 3 layouts? Or simply not vote on this?
> no, its too early to standardize on layouts.
And whether or not it is time (I find myself agreeing wit
Hi Steve,
thanks for this report, but it's too long. Really.
For now I will just say that I'm *really* horrified by the idea of
AH^wcommunity team keeping lists of people's behaviour. This can go very
wrong in so many directions easily.
Also I dont think that's Sam hastily conducted survey is o
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 01:35:59AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> tl;dr: Shall we standardize on 3 layouts? Or simply not vote on this?
no, its too early to standardize on layouts.
--
tschau,
Holger
---
On 7/23/19 7:31 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> 1- Mandating VcsGit and VcsBrowser, meaning we do mandate using Git for
> packaging.
>
> 2- Mandating using the "gbp patches unapplied" layout for Git, as this
> seems to be the most popular layout, and that we need some kind of
> consistency.
>
> 3- Ma
On 7/24/19 6:31 AM, Norbert Preining wrote:
> So be it, but don't put *your* bothering onto others. I am bothered by a
> lot of things, too, and I don't ask you to be bothered the same way.
Even if you dismiss Github, replace it by $foo, and explain to me why I
should register there because you ca
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:28:19PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On the other hand, not allowing source distribution as a “flat
> tarball” sounds like an additional restriction, which would be
> incompatible with the GPL. (Just like parts of glibc used to require
> distribution on tapes, only les
On July 24, 2019 1:16:37 PM UTC, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 24 juillet 2019 12:23 +00, Scott Kitterman :
>
>> This entire discussion feels to me like a small group of developers
>> trying to tell the rest of us "my way or the highway". We are
>> perfectly capable of phasing out obsolete workflow
* Adam Borowski:
> In the light of the currently discussed GR proposal, I wonder if the
> following license clause would be considered DFSG-free and GPL-compatible:
>
> ##
> I do not consider a flat tarball to be a preferred form for modification.
> Thus, like any non-source form,
* Bastian Blank:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 01:46:36AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 7/23/19 11:59 PM, Adam Borowski wrote:
>> > Big fat enormous NO! gbp is a workaround for the biggest evil in our
>> > packaging: quilt. Watching pro-git-only talks on the Debconf, I got the
>> > impression t
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:59:59PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Big fat enormous NO! gbp is a workaround for the biggest evil in our
> packaging: quilt. Watching pro-git-only talks on the Debconf, I got the
> impression that if we dropped the VCS-in-VCS approach, there'd be no need
> for most of
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 01:46:36AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 7/23/19 11:59 PM, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > Big fat enormous NO! gbp is a workaround for the biggest evil in our
> > packaging: quilt. Watching pro-git-only talks on the Debconf, I got the
> > impression that if we dropped the VC
On 7/23/19 6:49 PM, Adam Borowski wrote:
> In the light of the currently discussed GR proposal, I wonder if the
> following license clause would be considered DFSG-free and GPL-compatible:
>
> ##
> I do not consider a flat tarball to be a preferred form for modification.
> Thus, l
On 24.07.19 17:38, Fabien Givors wrote:
> Le 24/07/2019 à 15:16, Vincent Bernat a écrit :
>> Without a GR, the outcome is decided by a shouting contest. A GR seeems
>> great to know if people are a majority or not.
> A GR is not just a poll.
Yup. I personally see little chance this goes through.
Le 24/07/2019 à 15:16, Vincent Bernat a écrit :
> Without a GR, the outcome is decided by a shouting contest. A GR seeems
> great to know if people are a majority or not.
A GR is not just a poll.
Consider the following two questions:
i) Which is the recommended workflow among X, Y, Z?
ii) Do I ac
> Do you ask me to increase my work load to at least 300% only because of some
> standardization procedure for the minuscule chance that I am suddenly
> abducted by aliens?
No, it’s not about being abducted by the aliens, but there are other more
realistic factors
that might get any developer to
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 09:01:34PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2019, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> > > so, why isn't it enough to recommend those things?
> >
> > Because you are not the only developer in the whole world?
> > And when you disappear or just don’t have a time and somebody
❦ 24 juillet 2019 12:23 +00, Scott Kitterman :
> This entire discussion feels to me like a small group of developers
> trying to tell the rest of us "my way or the highway". We are
> perfectly capable of phasing out obsolete workflows without a hammer
> like a GR (remember dpatch).
Without a GR,
On July 24, 2019 10:43:57 AM UTC, Phil Morrell wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 07:34:02PM +1000, Alexander Zangerl wrote:
>> i detest unwarranted, imposed, uniformity. i *love* consistency. we
>have
>> had consistency in the distribution for ages. we don't need uniform
>> workflows.
>
>It's not
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> > so, why isn't it enough to recommend those things?
>
> Because you are not the only developer in the whole world?
> And when you disappear or just don’t have a time and somebody
> else needs to fix your packages, then it’s a heap of unnecessary
> trouble
> so, why isn't it enough to recommend those things?
Because you are not the only developer in the whole world?
And when you disappear or just don’t have a time and somebody
else needs to fix your packages, then it’s a heap of unnecessary
trouble to go through because of someones “personal” prefer
> I trust you are able to critize technology without attacking people, so
> there is NO reason to not speak out.
It was **me** who was thrown out for some time, so please leave the call
to me to decide what I post here - my trust in the currently responsible
teams to give a fair process is current
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 07:34:02PM +1000, Alexander Zangerl wrote:
> i detest unwarranted, imposed, uniformity. i *love* consistency. we have
> had consistency in the distribution for ages. we don't need uniform
> workflows.
It's not (always) about mandating workflows, see Ian's careful
distinctio
Vincent Bernat wrote:
> While not having any official position in either of these projects, I
> was able to contribute easily to both of them because they use a
> standard workflow: no need to read tons of documentation.
There is some truth in this, but I'm not sure the proposal is directly
addres
Hi,
Am 23.07.19 um 19:31 schrieb Thomas Goirand:
> So, the topics are:
>
> [snip]>
> 2- Mandating using the "gbp patches unapplied" layout for Git, as this
> seems to be the most popular layout, and that we need some kind of
> consistency.
Other people have already brought up reasons against thi
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 07:34:02PM +1000, Alexander Zangerl wrote:
> >> so, why isn't it enough to recommend those things?
> >Because without uniformity, we make it harder for people to contribute.
>
> i detest unwarranted, imposed, uniformity. i *love* consistency. we have
> had consistency in th
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 02:34:13 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > ##
> > > I do not consider a flat tarball to be a preferred form for modification.
> > > Thus, like any non-source form, it must be accompanied by a way to obtain
> > > the actual form for modification. There are ma
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:23:07 +0200, Vincent Bernat writes:
>> so, why isn't it enough to recommend those things?
>
>Because without uniformity, we make it harder for people to contribute.
i detest unwarranted, imposed, uniformity. i *love* consistency. we have
had consistency in the distribution f
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 02:23:26PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > > If we're not willing to force people to use debhelper, forcing them to
> > > use git and
> > > salsa seems much more extreme.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > let's first, if at all, get the mandatory use of debhelper into policy
> > wh
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:49:05AM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > If we're not willing to force people to use debhelper, forcing them to use
> > git and
> > salsa seems much more extreme.
>
> +1
>
> let's first, if at all, get the mandatory use of debhelper into policy
> which is much more imp
❦ 24 juillet 2019 17:07 +10, Alexander Zangerl :
> well, i do exist. i have a few packages that aren't vc'd, and i don't see
> any need to change that. while i don't mind git, but i'd hate to be _forced_
> to use salsa and gbp.
>
> so, why isn't it enough to recommend those things?
Because witho
On 15472 March 1977, Norbert Preining wrote:
I reply to you in private to make sure that my comments are not seen as
uttered within the Debian project, which could bring me into just
another difficult situation.
No it would not. Repeating the above as you recently love to do does not
make it a
On 7/24/19 7:29 AM, Harlan Lieberman-Berg wrote:
> If we're not willing to force people to use debhelper, forcing them to use
> git and
> salsa seems much more extreme.
+1
let's first, if at all, get the mandatory use of debhelper into policy
which is much more important.
Regards,
Daniel
On 24.07.2019 00:49, Adam Borowski wrote:
Hi!
In the light of the currently discussed GR proposal, I wonder if the
following license clause would be considered DFSG-free and GPL-compatible:
##
I do not consider a flat tarball to be a preferred form for modification.
Thus, like
Norbert Preining writes:
...
> I am personally not upset at all,
On reading back what you wrote, I see that the impression I'd somehow
gained has no basis in fact, so I'm sorry for even suggesting it.
Perhaps it was just the brief flurry of "Reply to every email" behaviour
that set some unconsc
Adam Borowski writes:
> Hi!
> In the light of the currently discussed GR proposal, I wonder if the
> following license clause would be considered DFSG-free and GPL-compatible:
>
> ##
> I do not consider a flat tarball to be a preferred form for modification.
> Thus, like any non-so
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019, Alexander Zangerl wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 07:07:51 +0200, Philip Hands writes:
> >You may be responding on behalf of people who turn out not to exist.
>
> well, i do exist. i have a few packages that aren't vc'd, and i don't see
> any need to change that. while i don't m
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 07:07:51 +0200, Philip Hands writes:
>You may be responding on behalf of people who turn out not to exist.
well, i do exist. i have a few packages that aren't vc'd, and i don't see
any need to change that. while i don't mind git, but i'd hate to be _forced_
to use salsa and gbp
Hi
> Would it not be worth waiting for them to respond to this issue
> themselves, rather than immediately firing off a series of emails that
> give the impression that you are personally upset about this?
Communication with contributors can be difficult and long delayed,
mostly due to being loca
42 matches
Mail list logo
