Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-11 Thread Michael Banck
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-11 Thread Hamish Moffatt
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-10 Thread Michael Banck
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-10 Thread Hamish Moffatt
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,

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-10 Thread Sven Luther
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-10 Thread Andrew Suffield
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-10 Thread Michael Banck
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-10 Thread Sven Luther
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Michael Banck
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Sven Luther
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Michael Banck
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Mark Brown
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Colin Watson
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Kevin Rosenberg
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Michael Banck
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Kevin Rosenberg
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Michael Banck
(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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Sven Luther
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

Re: Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Michael Banck
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

Proposed transition plan for non-free and call for help

2004-03-09 Thread Michael Banck
[-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