Hi Ian, I all the patents debian team,
We were discussing about the including of the geant4 package in debian.
Since there is an anti-patent point in
http://geant4.web.cern.ch/geant4/license/LICENSE.html , we are not sure
that it is possible to include geant4 in the science package. Please
fin
Christophe Hugon writes ("Re: Geant321 and geant4 in science package"):
> Hi Ian, I all the patents debian team,
> We were discussing about the including of the geant4 package in debian.
> Since there is an anti-patent point in
> http://geant4.web.cern.ch/geant4/license/LICENSE.html , we are not
Le dimanche, 19 janvier 2014, 12.39:01 Ian Jackson a écrit :
> Russ Allbery writes ("Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for
Debian"):
> > As a TC member, I dislike the supermajority requirement for the
> > project to overturn a TC decision by GR, particularly in this case.
> > I think we w
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 03:56:29PM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> I don't think our constitution allows a resolution of the TC to change
> how §4.1.4 has to be interpreted for a GR overriding it[0]. It would
> certainly need to be checked with the secretary (CC'ed, just in case).
>
That w
Neil McGovern writes ("Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian"):
> That would certainly seem to be the case, but it would be illogical for
> a group who is happy to be overridden with a lower requirement to be
> prevented from doing so!
Quite.
I think it's perfectly possible for a T
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 05:11:17PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Ian - any thoughts on if your tech-ctte constitution GR could address
> > this?
>
> You mean my TC resolution draft.
Nope, I meant your supermajorty etc draft.
Snipping the rest, as that seems to be something for tech-ctte, rather
"Didier 'OdyX' Raboud" writes:
> Le dimanche, 19 janvier 2014, 12.39:01 Ian Jackson a écrit :
>> I agree. I think that would be quite bad. We could explicitly state
>> in our TC resolution that the TC decision can be vacated by General
>> Resolution on a simple majority.
> I don't think our co
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 09:21:41AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> "Didier 'OdyX' Raboud" writes:
> > Le dimanche, 19 janvier 2014, 12.39:01 Ian Jackson a écrit :
>
> >> I agree. I think that would be quite bad. We could explicitly state
> >> in our TC resolution that the TC decision can be vacate
Neil McGovern writes ("Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian"):
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 05:11:17PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Ian - any thoughts on if your tech-ctte constitution GR could address
> > > this?
> >
> > You mean my TC resolution draft.
>
> Nope, I meant your sup
[ M-F-T and Reply-To set to debian-vote@l.d.o. ]
Hi!
This is the revised draft GR proposal (please see below); I'm looking
for sponsors now.
On Sun, 2014-01-19 at 01:01:44 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> I think that forcing a decision through the TC at this time was very
> premature and inappropr
I'd like to raise the objection that the TC hasn't done their job yet,
and while the TC has done a great job of getting *true* technically
grounded facts out yet, we've not let the process work.
Let the TC do their work. They're coming up on a vote, and they may even
suggest a GR.
This GR is pr
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 09:21:41AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> "Didier 'OdyX' Raboud" writes:
> > Le dimanche, 19 janvier 2014, 12.39:01 Ian Jackson a écrit :
>
> >> I agree. I think that would be quite bad. We could explicitly state
> >> in our TC resolution that the TC decision can be vacate
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 02:42:39PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> I'd like to raise the objection that the TC hasn't done their job yet,
> and while the TC has done a great job of getting *true* technically
> grounded facts out yet, we've not let the process work.
>
> Let the TC do their work. T
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
On 01/27/2014 08:39 PM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> This is the revised draft GR proposal (please see below); I'm looking for
> sponsors now.
please stop wasting people's time and let the TC do their work instead.
Thanks.
- --
Bernd Zeimetz
Russ Allbery writes:
> "Didier 'OdyX' Raboud" writes:
>> Le dimanche, 19 janvier 2014, 12.39:01 Ian Jackson a écrit :
>
>>> I agree. I think that would be quite bad. We could explicitly state
>>> in our TC resolution that the TC decision can be vacated by General
>>> Resolution on a simple majo
15 matches
Mail list logo
