On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 06:50:05PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> No. You only proposed to start with the debian-keyring, and did not
> promise not to diverge from it in the future. Debian has an NM
> procedure and team which I've grown to trust, but an
> NM-for-non-free.org process would have to g
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 03:43:47PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:38:47PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > I suspect some of our users might not want to use packages from a
> > less trusted source. I would have concerns myself.
>
> Of course, and this was indeed one the
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:38:47PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> I suspect some of our users might not want to use packages from a
> less trusted source. I would have concerns myself.
Of course, and this was indeed one the prime design requirements. Do
you feel your concerns are adequately addr
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 02:36:49PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> [-devel and -vote CCed. Please respect the Mail-Followup-To -project.
> You should really subscribe to -project, it's not that big. In any case,
> I will try read and reply to any comment]
I think this is relevant to debian-vote too,
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:22:28AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:25:32AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 08:15:42PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:48:20PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > What about recomends and sugges
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:22:28AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:25:32AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 08:15:42PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:48:20PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > What about recomends and sugges
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:25:32AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 08:15:42PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:48:20PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > What about recomends and suggests of contrib or non-free packages from
> > > debian/main ?
> >
> > H
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 08:15:42PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:48:20PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > What about recomends and suggests of contrib or non-free packages from
> > debian/main ?
>
> How should it handle it?
Well, i would say that recomends and suggests fr
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:48:20PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> What about recomends and suggests of contrib or non-free packages from
> debian/main ?
How should it handle it?
> How will this separate setup handle this ?
> What about conflicts ?
What do you propose?
Michael
--
Michael Banc
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 03:03:36PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 02:36:49PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > [-devel and -vote CCed. Please respect the Mail-Followup-To -project.
> > You should really subscribe to -project, it's not that big. In any case,
> > I will try read an
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 05:30:44PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> Wow, really? -vote is too much noise for me, but I definitely wouldn't
> see any reason to move my couple of non-free packages away from
> debian.org if the vote goes that way.
Fair enough. I certainly don't want to second-guess maint
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 04:02:50PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> You'd have to ask people actually maintaing non-free packages here. From
> the discussions on -vote, I was under this impression. I could well be
> wrong though.
I'd have thought anyone keeping up with these threads on -vote is
disp
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 04:02:50PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:29:58AM -0700, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:
> > Michael Banck wrote:
> > > once non-free is removed from debian.org. In fact, we might try to get
> > > non-free.org running even no matter what the outcome of the g
Michael Banck wrote:
> You'd have to ask people actually maintaing non-free packages here. From
> the discussions on -vote, I was under this impression. I could well be
> wrong though.
I suppose I could ask myself: I maintain 7 non-free packages which is
6% of the total packages I maintain. I'm as
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:29:58AM -0700, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:
> Michael Banck wrote:
> > once non-free is removed from debian.org. In fact, we might try to get
> > non-free.org running even no matter what the outcome of the general
> > resolution will be, provided maintainers are interested in m
Michael Banck wrote:
> once non-free is removed from debian.org. In fact, we might try to get
> non-free.org running even no matter what the outcome of the general
> resolution will be, provided maintainers are interested in moving their
> packages there.
One of the advantages of keeping non-free
(Moving this to -project and CCing you, as I doubt your subscribed
there)
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 03:03:36PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > 2. The proposed implementation for non-free.org.
> >
> > Basically, there are two possibilities, a) using a GForge service and b)
> > reproducing the debian.o
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 02:36:49PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> [-devel and -vote CCed. Please respect the Mail-Followup-To -project.
> You should really subscribe to -project, it's not that big. In any case,
> I will try read and reply to any comment]
Thanks Michael for taking the time to do thi
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 02:36:49PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> [-devel and -vote CCed. Please respect the Mail-Followup-To -project.
> You should really subscribe to -project, it's not that big. In any case,
> I will try read and reply to any comment]
Sorry about the M-F-T. Mutt seems to have re
[-devel and -vote CCed. Please respect the Mail-Followup-To -project.
You should really subscribe to -project, it's not that big. In any case,
I will try read and reply to any comment]
This document describes a proposal for a transition plan for non-free.
Note that I thought about this for quite a
20 matches
Mail list logo