Re: Debian OpenPGP audit log

+debian-project, debian-private -> bcc Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On Tue 2017-10-10 15:22:06 +0200, Enrico Zini wrote: >> To me it would be already a big step forward to make Debian workflows >> auditable, so anyone can have a look at what other people are doing. >> >> Contributions are generall

Re: Doing something about "should remain private forever" emails

Stephen Gran wrote: > So, who's going to do this work? While they're reading every single > message sent to the list over the last decade and a half, wouldn't it > make more sense to just honor the GR than to make up more work that > nobody is ever going to do? I think Raphael was suggesting inc

Poor BTS interactions (Re: [all candidates] Removing or limiting DD rights?)

Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Well, I certainly didn't mean to imply that bug report handling is not > something we should look into improving. It's the causation relationship > between that and the decreasing number of bug reports which seems > unlikely to me. I think it is likely a real factor, t

Re: Pegasos II PowerPC Plattform

Hallo, aPEX wrote: > ich wollte mich nur bedanken das selbst mit dem 6.0.5 Release noch eine > volle Unterstützung der Pegasos PowerPC Plattform stattfindet. :-) > > Auf eurer Seite steht dies zwar nur bis Version 4, aber auch die 6 lässt sich > so problemlos auf diesem amiganoiden System install

Re: About FTP Masters requirements for Debian copyright files.

Charles Plessy wrote: > Some licenses include a template for “notices” (GPL), “exhibits” (MPL), etc., > also called “headers” or “boilerplates”. [...] > More in details, one of the questions was to know if > the reason for reproducing them is to include the disclaimer of wa

Re: copyright-format: "with exception" underspecified

Steve Langasek wrote: > However, the history of the draft shows that people are concerned > about knowing whether *specific* common exceptions are in effect Good point. For example, the "GPL-2 with OpenSSL exception" and "OpenSSL" licenses are compatible, while GPL-2 and the OpenSSL licenses are

DEP-5 suggestions

Hi, Here is the rough format of dep5[1] copyright files, if I understand the proposal correctly. {} denotes variables, [] optional elements, and ... "et cetera". This is almost certainly wrong in parts (it includes guesswork), so I encourage you to correct me, especially if this might result in