On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 12:32:02AM +, Joey Hess wrote:
> dm:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Full name: Aur??lien G?\x89R?\x94ME
So did that display any better for people with properly setup fonts?
Cheers,
aj
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 08:59:56PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> It was closer, but there were stray x89 and x94 strings (as literal
> strings, not as escapes or hex encodings of characters).
Ah, well, that makes some sense. That's what gpg's dumping to me:
$ gpg --with-colons --list-key 65B4B162
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 09:55:19AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > > Why can't we manage the DEP list just like the rest in a VCS ? A VCS
> > > commit is atomic. :)
> > To avoid religious was on which VCS to choose :-)
> Just use svn for that part.
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:18:30PM +0100, Adeodato Sim?? wrote:
> Currently, when having discussions about improvements to Debian, it is
> not always clear when consensus has been reached, and people willing to
> implement it may start too early, [...]
Isn't it useful to have sample implementation
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:12:53AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> If people want to do this, it's useful. The problem that is described
> is that people don't actually want to do this, because they don't know
> if their solution will be used.
That seems a pretty bad rationale -- implementing your s
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 12:15:33PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > > For example, the machine-parsable copyright thing
> > > seems (to me) to be pretty much accepted as a Good Thing, but it's
> > > unclear when it would be a good idea to start suggesting or even
> > > mandating it in policy.
> > Well,
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 01:16:29PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> If we called this field a summary, one interface to use it could be to
> mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] to set a new summary. This would add
> the message to the detailed bug log, [...]
That more or less means having a particular message in the
Not really an automated mail, but we can pretend.
The following changes to the Debian keyring have been made:
ag
Full name: Aurelien Gerome
Linked key: 2FC3907C20D963EBB234D023236C60C665B4B162
(formerly belonging to dm:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
akumar
Full name: Kumar Appaiah
Adde
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 07:53:15AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> The following changes to the Debian keyring have been made:
> May I guess that this good news is somehow connected to [1]?
> If yes, thanks once more to our former DPL!
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 09:10:25PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > ,[ The social contract is a goal, not a binding contract ]
> > | This amends the proposal above, and replaces the text of the proposal
> > | with: The developers, via a general resolution, determine that the
> > | social cont
> On Fri Dec 19 21:10, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > ,[ The social contract is binding but may be overridden by a simple
> > > GR ]
> > > | This amends the proposal above, and replaces the text of the proposal
> > > | with: The developers, via a general resolution, determine that the
> > > | s
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:18:01PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think these have the same flaw as our current situation: none of them
> state who interprets the Social Contract and the DSFG if there is a
> dispute over what they mean.
If there is a dispute in Debian, there are three levels at
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> * "Vocal minority" dominates "silent majority" by contributing a
> disproportionate amount of list traffic, [...]
Note that voting can have a similar drawback -- in that if you've got
enough like-minded people voting for a particular
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 04:12:58AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 July 2009, Meike Reichle wrote:
> > The Debian project has decided to adopt a new policy of time-based
> > development freezes for future releases, on a two-year cycle.
> Disappointing to see such an announcement without a
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:25:01AM +0200, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> Steffen Moeller schrieb:
> > Same here. The release team, or the individual that pressed the button for
> > the
> > announcement, I suggest to apologize for disturbing our community.
> The text was coordinated within the
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 01:09:35PM +, Anthony Towns wrote:
> For three, what happened to getting the firmware issue resolved early in
> squeeze's cycle [1]? It's evidently no longer early in squeeze's cycle,
> so maybe I just somehow missed the decisio
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:49:48AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Doesn't this imply that everyone who continues using Debian today does so
> merely as an accident of the release schedule and the particular set of
> packages that land in a given Debian release?
That and the fact that upgrades betw
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 05:17:57PM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 01:07:39PM +0000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > [...] The tradeoffs to me seem to be:
> >
> > Debian stable Ubuntu LTS
> >
> > 2 year rel cycle
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 05:44:58PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:51:35AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Also in many cases, Ubuntu and Debian teams can't fully collaborate
> > because they do not target the same upstream version, freezing at the same
> > time should make
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 11:55:04AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Amen. I think two years is a little too long and 18 months would be much
> > better.
> We never actually have managed the 18 month release, have we? We
> freeze approximatly 18
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 08:44:29PM +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> Margarita Manterola wrote:
> > If Debian commits to a December freeze, would that mean that Ubuntu
> > commits to releasing 10.04 with KDE 4.3 (already released) and [...]
> The proposal as I understood it was that in December, th
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 03:55:16PM +, Anthony Towns wrote:
> etch: 2006/12 - 2007/04 (decent hit for feisty's import freeze)
> lenny: 2008/07 - 2009/02 (decent hit for jaunty's import freeze)
>
> dapper and hardy are the two Ubuntu LTS releases so far
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 07:42:24PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Comparison between etch/main and feisty/main+universe by source:
> As at today (2009/08/11) etch/feisty security support compare as follows:
> 63 packages with security updates in both Debian and Ubuntu (11
Hmm, let&#
ing problems.
The difference between this situation and undistributable ROMs and
binaries is that there we *can't* do anything about it, whereas here
we're simply saying we *won't*.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak
ion
> > control.
> There are (at least) two implementations of package pools:
"package pools" is used as a bit of a coverall for "any interesting change
to the archive", so it's not very precise often.
> 1. Anthony Towns' at http://auric.debian.org/~ajt/>
ree replacement.
Respectfully submitted,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.
``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting.
We believe in: rough consensus and
er to make Gnome packages
consistent, or to make IPv6 packages usable, or even to distribute
Debianised KDE source.
I imagine this ammendment would be best as a separate option on the
ballot to the original proposal, and as such it will require five seconds.
Respectfully submitted,
aj
--
Antho
On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 06:34:00PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Having Lyx not have an explicit dependency on xforms (apt-get install lyx
> > succeeds, but it doesn't work, why not?), or having that dependency not be
> >
On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 10:44:24PM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 05:22:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 11:03:33PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > DEBIAN GENERAL RESOLUTION
> > > Proposed by: John Goerzen <[E
On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 03:30:04PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 1) the Debian project continues to acknowledge the utility of providing
> > non-free software for it users.
> What do we need a GR for this? What makes
On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 11:45:32PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> On Jun 11, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > As I understand it, at this point two votes need to take place: one to
> > determine what form the resolution should take so that developers may
> > choose between John'
On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 11:07:57PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > to dists/woody/
> > add-on/
> > gnome-helix
> > kde
> > wouldn't alter that, whil
of forking
the project.
This is ridiculous.
Why, exactly, _can't_ we all just get along?
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.
``We reject: kings, presidents, and
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 12:21:22AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2000 at 03:31:48PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > Debian is about building the best *free* operatign system
> This is ridiculous.
It's also hyperbole, not all that well argued and not particul
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 09:10:47PM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 05:22:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > The intention of this ammendment is to provide a means for developers to
> > offer their support of the existing social contract while acknowledgi
ary-hurd-i386/*
(there's exactly one .deb in dists/unstable/non-free/binary-hurd-i386/,
btw :)
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``We reject: kings, presidents,
easy.
In all probability? Personally, I suspect obtaining non-free software
will become noticably more inconvenient, and that maintaining non-free
software will become a downright pain in the neck.
> In either case, there is no net harm to the users or to the Free
> Software community.
I r
'm just putting words in your mouth, and that's not
anything at all like what you're trying to say, and I'm just an irrational
and unethical goon trying to wrest the project from the ideals it was
founded upon. *sigh* Whatever.
Just for the record: Debian's support of non-
olution
succeed, and no non-free archive appear?
Cheers,
aj, who notes normally you're not meant to have to argue a negative
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``We r
been proved. Since this is a matter of interpretation, I hope
we'll all accept the secretary's interpretation when he makes it known?
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mai
be having more
"accidents" real soon!
Muahahahahahaha!
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting.
han actually physically
showing someone your passport, and letting them look at the photo
and your face and saying "Gosh, you look different".
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak fo
; "555-" "Okay." [dial] [ring, ring] "Hello" "Hi,
I'm calling about your n-m application..."
Can you give an example scenario where, given a phone call and given a key
signed by one or two other developers (who've checked passports and such
on file? What's the *point*?
> > 1. (somewhat) Speedier processing for those applicants are able to
> > convince existing Debian Developers to sign their key.
> We already have that, as they don't need to provide a phone contact for ID
> verification.
But they do for "
Florian Weimer wrote:
* Wouter Verhelst:
Uhm. Debian has had two lawyers look at the respective laws and suggest
us a procedure, which we follow; and it included setting the permission
bits as they currently are. We've done that for a few years now, and
nothing bad has happened. Why should we sudde
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
they is gender-neutral? Leads to very bad-sounding, at least for my ear,
things like
How have they contributed to Debian already?
What do they intend to do for Debian in the future?
How do they interact with others, such as users and o
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 03:41:51PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
A nit: y'all is singular. "all y'all" is plural. Notherners
often get this wrong.
Amusing to have this juxtaposed with the statement that English is a
terrible language for purity. ;)
Yes, I'm a northern
Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
Anthony Towns asks,
Is there any reason why grammar, porn and spam debates
are attracting so much traffic?
With reference to the three specific topics
listed---grammar, porn and spam---and at the risk of
inadvertently choosing inapt words, one might illustrate
the two
Marco Presi wrote:
They asked me if they could define their bicycle team as "Debian
Powered" and print Debian logo on their T-Shirts. They are a
non-profit team and I guess they will use those T-Shirt only for
bicycling, NOT for sell, so.. I don't see reasons against this.
As long as t
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Matt Kraai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.09.1239 +0100]:
This has been prohibited in the past. I'm not sure why; I suspect to
prevent consultants from having an entry for every country.
I suppose this is a fair argument. Maybe it could be required to
produce proof
martin f krafft wrote:
Obviously, for reasons unknown to the mere mortals, the above only
applies to topics of the mere mortals of Debian, not to certain
members of the cabal. Some vital components of the Debian project
are better kept away from the public, or they could be flooded with
opinions or
hat my salary has been misplaced, I wonder if you would be so kind as
to inform the HR department and request they look into the matter?
Or, wait, perhaps you aren't my boss, and you've got absolutely no
business demanding that I account for my time?
also sprach Anthony Towns [2005.02.16.
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
I am not your boss, but I am (too) interested in understanding why the
tasks of the ftpmaster role seems to be moving slow.
Honestly, I'd love to talk about these sorts of things more publically;
but I'm not willing to do that in an environment that's actively hostile.
Che
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.16.2334 +0100]:
When have you ever seen Martin F. Krafft gratuitously insult anyone?
Well, almost everytime i read one of his posts to the lists.
I'll refrain from gratuitously insulting you.
This thread is not a
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Anthony Towns [2005.02.16.1703 +0100]:
Or, wait, perhaps you aren't my boss, and you've got absolutely no
business demanding that I account for my time?
Doesn't the position of a delegate bear a certain amount of
responsibility and duties, whic
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On 17-02-2005 00:25, Anthony Towns wrote:
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
I am not your boss, but I am (too) interested in understanding why the
tasks of the ftpmaster role seems to be moving slow.
Honestly, I'd love to talk about these sorts of things more publically;
but I&
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Anthony Towns [2005.02.17.0025 +0100]:
Honestly, I'd love to talk about these sorts of things more
publically;
Why have you not done so in the past?
Why haven't you stopped beating your wife?
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2002/06/msg
martin f krafft wrote:
Maybe we should tabulate most commonly bashed roles and see if there
is a correlation with inavailability of information?
What would be the point? That would tell us nothing about causation,
which is the question at issue.
Regards,
aj
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROT
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On 17-02-2005 02:43, Anthony Towns wrote:
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Here is a fresh non-APT non-hostile thread. Please respond...
Dude, if a new thread was enough to avoid folks deciding that it'd be
fun to randomly throw in insults and other distractions, I'd
Joel Aelwyn wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:53:47AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
martin f krafft wrote:
Maybe we should tabulate most commonly bashed roles and see if there
is a correlation with inavailability of information?
What would be the point? That would tell us nothing about causation
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On 17-02-2005 06:17, Anthony Towns wrote:
Then how about spending a little time thinking, first? Seriously, this
isn't a debating exercise here; I'm not putting words together just to
see how they sound.
Why would you /possibly/ imagine retitling the thread woul
martin f krafft wrote:
Then I wrote an email, which, I give you that, was below the
waisteline, but look at the effect: every constructive post
following my initial message came from people wondering what
ftpmasters are and what they are doing.
So, what, exactly did those posts "construct"?
Certain
st section could
at least be made explicit.
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Anthony Towns [2005.02.17.1307 +0100]:
Can you possibly conceive there might perhaps be some other
explanation for why I'm not writing tediously long emails or
involved in heated debates about what changes to the ar
Thomas Hood wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 02:00:13 +0100, Anthony Towns wrote:
martin f krafft wrote:
There are people
who want information from you, and those people have a right to this
information because it is *our* project, not yours.
You have absolutely no right to demand /anything/ of me, /at
Thomas Hood wrote:
So you are denying that ftpmasters have responsibilities beyond refraining
from working against the rest of the project? It seems you are.
Yes. Just like every other member of the project.
It says so right there in the constitution, very first point. It's sad
that you seem to w
Anthony Towns wrote:
an attack on a subgroup you have a grudge against.
Bah, that was uncalled for. I've no reason to think Thomas is holding
any grudges.
What's sad is that even as Martin Krafft seems to be sincere in wanting
to apologise and get on with things (in private mail an
MJ Ray wrote:
DDs want know about ftpmasters, but ftpmasters don't send
much to debian-devel-announce: it seems like mostly after stuff
breaks. DDs don't know how to make them want to do anything,
so that leaves three obvious options:
1. use democractic processes to fix this;
2. make their lives
martin f krafft wrote:
All we want is information, AJ.
If it is okay with you, I propose an experiment. Over the next days
(or weeks... after all you surely have your priorities), I ask you
to prepare a little announcement or document which states the
following:
And you know, all you're achieving b
Joel Aelwyn wrote:
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 08:08:55PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
What's sad is that even as Martin Krafft seems to be sincere in wanting
to apologise and get on with things (in private mail anyway), the torch
is just taken up by Thomas and Joel and MJ Ray anyway an
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
You need access to the NEW queue. But if I'm not misinformed any DD
can get to the mirror on merkel?
Packages may not be downloaded from the NEW queue due to US crypto
regulations (and Debian's approach to fulfilling the resulting
requirements); however if your package
Matthew Palmer wrote:
AFAIK, we don't notify for every new piece of software in the archive, just
those which would fall foul of the export restrictions.
That's mistaken -- we automatically notify for all NEW packages, so that
we don't have to examine every upload of every package in order to send
Matthew Palmer wrote:
Do you believe that the ftpmaster team might be amenable to either of the
proposals mooted recently, such as multiple people certifying that the
package is OK (like "advocates for packages"), or a collection of clueful
DDs doing these sanity checks on NEW packages?
First, I sh
David Schmitt wrote:
On Monday 14 March 2005 23:57, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
P.S.: I'm not saying I am starting to rewrite it, but I'm considering...
I think I can remember rumours about a major debbugs updated for post-sarge.
Consider contacting debugs' maintainers first.
There's the version tracking
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.03.16.1344 +0100]:
I found the first hour basically wasted time - the strength of IRC
is that it's real-time, while the form of the first hour of debate
did not really use that,
The goal of the first hour was to make sur
Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 01:55:34PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 12:44:36PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
the host system. That would suggest that it would also be worth having
a separate section specifically for data to be downloaded to hardware,
Well, there you e
Henning Makholm wrote:
modified-noncommercial-redistribution
nonprofit-mod-dist
unmodified-noncommercial-redistribution
nonprofit-dist
unmodified-commercial-redistribution
free-dist
all-freedoms-in-the-gfdl
fsf-free
dfsg-freedom-of-all-runnable-programs
free-software-and-firmware
Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 01:17:02AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
I wonder if it would be worth considering a "fsf-free" component that
offers a Packages file listing packages from non-free with the fsf-free
tag.
Personally I would like that. But making a separat
Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Anthony Towns
Henning Makholm wrote:
dfsg-freedom-of-all-runnable-programs
free-software-and-firmware
dfsg-freedom-of-all-main-cpu-runnable-programs
free-software
Given the historically demonstrated ambiguity of the term "software" I
think it would be
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Is there one? Should there be?
(Frankly, I'd be amazed if there's any set of conditions that would
render Ian Murdock's posts unreasonable while allowing the stuff that's
on my Livejournal.)
In the past, I've censored my political ramblings from Planet Debian on
request; and
Ean Schuessler wrote:
In the end, isn't this a blog aggregator? It isn't a mailing list and I don't
think the same rules apply. Effectively, Planet is trying to impose editorial
conditions on peoples *diaries*.
No, that would be editorial conditions on the parts of developer's
public journals th
one would
assume), -devel-announce and/or -news would be a much better place.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL.
"Debian + Data" CD set, and still have them lying
around.
> Pros of this policy:
> 2) Avoids controversial materials (politics and religious texts)
Like bitchx, or SATAN, or nmap, or devfs? :)
> Of course, with some common sense we would have avoided this
> discussion.
Common
locally.
$ apt-get source -b foo # to get source and build
There isn't a `get source, build and install' option afaik; and
build-depends aren't implemented yet; but still.
There's no reason why you can't store just the rebuilt .deb or just
the source locally, either, a
le to upload
source without a binary (for the auto-builders to build, eg). Or at least,
if there is, I couldn't figure it out.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
chive anymore.
Third, voting on `this is what these people will spend their time on in
future' is completely inappropriate. If it's really a better way, they'll
spend their time on it because they want to. If it's a bit ambiguous,
you can spend your time on it if you want to.
Ch
once to mirror `unstable/foo' then a fortnight later, to mirror
`testing/foo'. A package pool is one way of solving this, but it makes it
difficult to mirror a single architecture.
H.
http://www.debian.org/~ajt/testing-19991025.tar.gz for what code I've
done, fwiw.
Cheers,
dding
it to policy.
Here, we ought to be discussing what we need (which we've done for over
a year now), implementing it, and /then/ working out whether we want to
actually use it or not.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don&
g the code written? I'm going to
keep plodding away at my code, if you (sing/plural, take your pick) want
to work on that too, feel free to bug me either on this list, -devel, or
by private email.
Cheers,
aj, who might add that he sees voting as a quick and easy way of ignoring
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 07:37:55AM -0700, Robert Jones wrote:
> Quoth Anthony Towns on 25 Oct, 1999:
(Saith?)
> [ Disclaimer: I am not a Debian developer yet, due to the new-maintainer
*sigh*
> > First, proposals without code are pointless. They're fun and all to
> >
eans finding some way of choosing which packages should be in
which Packages file. Currently we use dpkg-scanpackages and physically
move files around (ie, this is yet more scripts to be written).
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don&
the same message that details what those
activities probably ought to be. If there's been some misunderstandings
in the past, how about we clear them up, rather than try to work out
whose fault it was? Yeesh.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.
I do?
Restate your objections in public? (Forward the appropriate mails from
-private to -project?)
Become a member of n-m and subvert it from within? (Under the `those
what do the work make the rules' theory)
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.o
So the BSD folks aren't part of the free software community?
You're insane.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
``The thing is: trying to
On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 01:55:10PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 1999 at 10:06:18PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > Please, people, if you have not thought through the ramifications of
> > > what you are trying to do, take a st
stitution will rap us on the knuckles? Bad
developers. Naughty.
Feh.
This doesn't do anything to address the real issue (getting
new-maintainers back on its feet), and only seems to give people something
to point to when whining about how everyone else isn't doing everything
for them.
We&#
.
Cheers,
aj
[0] http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-project-9910/msg00060.html
[1] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/testing-19991211.tgz
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail prefer
On Sun, Dec 12, 1999 at 12:37:19AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> You may or may not have seen or remember me talking a while ago about a
> `testing' distribution. I wanted it to fit somewhere between `stable'
> and `unstable', and be automatically populated from package
he problem (which has not been forthcoming) or the
There aren't enough people doing work. The people who understand how to
get this right are busy.
Saying `hey, you suck at new-maintainering' and other junk isn't exactly
the best way to encourage them to work on it, either.
Cheer
for `debian popularity-contest' on google turns it up first go.
*sigh* Lovely search engine.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.
``The thing is: trying to be to
On Sat, Dec 18, 1999 at 12:14:42AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 12, 1999 at 12:37:19AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Continuing my quest to see how many times I can reply to myself...
> > You may or may not have seen or remember me talking a while ago about a
>
201 - 300 of 374 matches
Mail list logo
