On 14263 March 1977, Paul Slootman wrote:
> As I have no idea who to contact about this, I'm sending this message to
> debian-project. I would like to transfer debian.nl to the project so
> that it's in safe hands.
And for the list, as the rest (transfer&co) is going off-list: The right
contact fo
On 14634 March 1977, Russ Allbery wrote:
> The content should be such that it is suitable for people over 12
> years of age.
> now in the PlanetDebian wiki page added with the above revision is, if
> true, quite significant. If that is Planet Debian policy, I'll switch my
> aggregation fe
On 14634 March 1977, shirish शिरीष wrote:
> While Laura had shared with me that she is the only one who is behind
> the antiharassm...@debian.org, I was under the mis-guided
> understanding that pla...@debian.org was a team and not just Benjamin
> alone.
You can find out who is behind which team
On 14635 March 1977, shirish शिरीष wrote:
> Thank you for your fine words. The same goes for everybody else as
> well. This is going to be a bit long-winded so please excuse.
Is anything you ever wrote short? I have yet to see the day where you
produce output thats less than a dozen paragraphs. An
On 14907 March 1977, Ximin Luo wrote:
> The current team names are a bit of a mess [1], and forcing everyone
> to use a suffix "-team" isn't helping because everyone is picking
> inconsistent prefixes instead.
> Glancing through the current list of public groups, I suggest the
> following prefixe
On 15011 March 1977, Ian Jackson wrote:
> * Where appropriate, recommend action to: DAM, TC, listmaster, IRC
>operators, DPL. Information about the situation would be provided
>by the disputes team to the gatekeeper team; but the gatekeeper
>team would not be expected to make its own
On 15270 March 1977, Jonathan Carter wrote:
Dear Planet administrators and debian-project
Based on the very short amount of discussion we've had so far,
I'd like to make the following changes to
https://wiki.debian.org/PlanetDebian
Yah, followed that, didn't see reason to add more to it. :)
On 15271 March 1977, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
Probably better to say something like, "When a blog is removed,
the committer should send a direct email message to the author
of the removed content explaining the reason for the removal."
Ah please not.
That keeps potentially loaded statement
On 15271 March 1977, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
And I sometimes remove blogs for them just going 5xx. A commit
msg is fine.
I still think an email to the author would be a good thing in
that case. I have had parts of my site stop functioning and
known of it for some time. An email from someon
On 15273 March 1977, Matthew Vernon wrote:
Appeals to the DPL wouldn't be compatible with the current
version of our constitution.
That is sort-of orthogonal to whether they'd be a good idea or
not :) Yes, I see that the constitution specifically prohibits
the DPL from withdrawing the delegat
Hello everyone,
One of the things that emerged from the recent discussions around DAM actions
is that we are missing a way to review or appeal DAM's decision. Currently
the only way to do this is running a full-featured GR, with all the negative
side effects such a process has.
While a GR i
On 15276 March 1977, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
we waive the time limit defined in §1 for the cases
from the last 6 months.
Would it make sense to have them 1 week from publishing this
instead?
Thanks for that. Yeah, that offer is not valid forever, but as we normally say
30 days, lets make it 14 day
On 15276 March 1977, Thomas Lange wrote:
Do you plan an official announcement of this new procedure?
It will end up on d-d-a in a few days, provided someone doesn't find a big
flaw in it.
JFTR: Thanks Enrico for pointing me how to see the list of members
that will vote. Keep in mind that thi
On 15276 March 1977, Karsten Merker wrote:
4. NM Committee review
--
The NMC has 7 days to review the received material and discuss the matter
in
private. They are expected not to solicit further input, as this is not an
inquiry but a peer review of the DAM decision.
I'm n
On 15277 March 1977, Ian Jackson wrote:
Very regrettably, it may become necessary to produce a fuller list of
incidents, including responses, to justify the recent DAM decision.
Please search your communications archives. If you have had an
adverse experience of any kind with Norbert Preining, i
On 15277 March 1977, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Thank you very much, Joerg (and DAM team) for coming up with this
proposal. I have just returned to work after a month off, and my brain
isn't yet 100% wired to be productive again (WAY off 100%, I'd say),
but this really looks like a good (although perfec
On 15324 March 1977, npd...@zoho.com wrote:
I have gone through the link: (Exploring Cryptographic Software in
Debian's Main Archive) https://www.debian.org/legal/cryptoinmain
I would like to clarify what I have understood: one is not allowed to
use Debian's main archive for commercial use (
On 15326 March 1977, npd...@zoho.com wrote:
I am posting an excerpt from the 'Data privacy' page
(https://www.debian.org/legal/privacy):
Service related logging
In addition to the explicitly listed services above the Debian
infrastructure logs details about system accesses for the purposes
On 15337 March 1977, Sam Hartman wrote:
In fairness, I'd recommend that the nominations period be extended for
some explicit time. I think that we want to have a known window for new
nominations rather than say starting the campaigning as soon as someone
nominates themselves.
§5.2.4 to the re
On 15337 March 1977, Zlatan Todorić wrote:
So, funny, maybe we will live to our long history of community
fostering (which is the thing I most enjoy from Debian, besides that
we produce kickass OS) and be leaderless as we in all nature of
project actually are.
While the idea of going leaderles
On 15409 March 1977, Sam Hartman wrote:
Imagine that I get a note from a random developer saying they have
removed my blog from planet. I understand what they are saying enough
to believe it is not vandalism; they honestly believe I did something
wrong. I can't understand from their message ho
On 15451 March 1977, Alexander Wirt wrote:
The tone is absolutely civilized.
And yet, the cost to people who have to do this education again and
again is really high.
Thats possible, but imho not a reason to kill the thread.
It is a very good reason to do so, and its sad that our listmasters
On 15472 March 1977, Norbert Preining wrote:
I reply to you in private to make sure that my comments are not seen as
uttered within the Debian project, which could bring me into just
another difficult situation.
No it would not. Repeating the above as you recently love to do does not
make it a
On 15523 March 1977, Sam Hartman wrote:
Subject: Free Software Needs Free Tools
I think the subject does not fit the content. Its more like "Forbid DDs
to use certain services".
No Debian contributor should be expected or encouraged, when working to
improve Debian, to use non-free tool
On 15563 March 1977, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
[ TL;DR: the "default mail handling" option in LDAP now actually does
something by default :) and additional optional checks are available. ]
[...]
Adam
wrangling exim on behalf of DSA
Thank you!
--
bye, Joerg
On 15614 March 1977, Gerardo Ballabio wrote:
Anyway, thank you for clarifying that using people's preferred
pronouns is a requisite for being welcome in Debian. As I read them,
neither the CoC nor the Diversity Statement are explicit on that.
Maybe it would be useful to make it explicit?
They
On 15615 March 1977, Martina Ferrari wrote:
Good to know that you prefer to include bigots in Debian in exchange for
marginalised people, I am sure the other trans and nonbinary folk in
Debian must feel very welcome around you. At least you are being open
about it.
Are you misreading him on pu
On 16087 March 1977, Martin Meredith wrote:
Nominally, I was put in charge a while back, as whoever was in charge
of it at the time didn’t want to be involved any more, and there was a
need for something to be done related to the software/server (I can’t
quite remember) - which is where Joerg wa
ut to your close circle of friends, and the Community Team.
--
For the DAMs,
Joerg Jaspert
Enrico Zini
Jonathan Wiltshire
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 16159 March 1977, Charles Plessy wrote:
I was wondering if this alternative address was intended for a
purpose,
or just an accident. I ask on this list and not directly to DSA in
case
everybody who filled first and last name information also has this
alias.
This is not so important on my
> Because of this I would like to have some means to suggest using
> #debian-ro in OFTC rather than Freenode. Currently I'm running a bot
> telling people joining that they should switch to OFTC, but I don't like
> to spam people. I also tried using to bot to redirect, but it's very
> annoying
Hello world,
the FTPTeam will have a meeting at the weekend of 18/19th September.
Our preliminary agenda for this meeting is attached below, if you think
we should take something on it, reply, but keep in mind that the meeting
time is limited. :)
The meeting will be held in Fulda, at my place, an
> | the FTPTeam will have a meeting at the weekend of 18/19th September.
> | Our preliminary agenda for this meeting is attached below, if you think
> | we should take something on it, reply, but keep in mind that the meeting
> | time is limited. :)
> If you have the time, getting some input on 3.0
>> - dak policy
>>That is, a command so $whoever_DD can do "policy work" on a suite,
>>which is otherwise run by ftpmaster. Examples: backports.org,
>>volatile, possibly p-u. The teams of that define which packages go
>>in those suites, while ftpmaster runs the suite (and has the u
Hello,
in the past the policy for Debian account names was "once selected,
never changed". Considering the mass of things attached to an account,
like
- the amount of machines Debian runs,
- the (possible) mass of cronjobs,
- file ownerships, including in team directories,
- sudo rights,
- g
Hello world,
as you probably read on debian-project[1] there was a meeting of the
FTPTeam in Fulda last weekend. Mark, Alexander and myself met from
Friday til Sunday to discuss various topics we had on agenda - and to
discover multiple new restaurants all around my place. :)
And while I still mis
>> 2. Call for volunteers
> I volunteer to help the processing the NEW queue. I have a some experience in
> inspecting packages, through working on a team that maintains more than a
> hundred of them, and through my proposal for a chain reaction of copyright
> file
> peer reviews (http://wiki.de
On 12248 March 1977, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> 15. control-suite sanity
>> Right now there is no sane version checking done when we import new
>> data into a suite using c-s. This means that in theory the release
>> managers could put packages/versions from any suite into testing
>>
On 12248 March 1977, Hector Oron wrote:
>> 11. debian-ports
>> [...]
>> that FTPMaster does the technic while someone else is actually
>> responsible for it. So 2 or more DDs need to sign up for the work
>> per arch, if they drop out and noone replaces, it gets removed, etc.
> I wou
>> Alexander helped our removal tool to gain a new option. From now on
>> we can close bugs associated to a package when doing a sourceful
>> removal. Obviously this is not enabled by default, but an option we
>> have to select whenever appropriate (not all removals mean all bugs
>>
Heyho,
as we have many tasks on our plate but not nearly enough time nor people
to do them all, let me try something and ask you, the project members,
to help out. No, I don't want money, though I wouldn't say no to it, of
course. Better yet. I have work to give away... And this task has the
nicet
> Would it be a lot of work for the DM team to ask non uploading DD to
> wait some time (perhaps 6 month) as non uploading DM.
This makes no sense.
A DM is defined as someone who can upload a specially marked packaged.
WTF is a non-uploading DM? So a non-uploading uploader of a package? What?
--
> Nowadays, It seems that planet.debian.org became an important news media
> and has a fairly large number of readers. I think that a large number of
> mails sent to d-d-a (or debian-announce) may take advantage of this media
> to gain more visibility (e.g. various RFH sent to d-d-a by various team
On 12293 March 1977, Holger Levsen wrote:
> I think we as a project should not tolerate such, agree so, and provide
> simple
> filter mechanisms, so that people can continue to have these links in _their_
> blog posts, while they are filtered out on http://planet.debian.org
No. I would want it
> Can you be more precise? Since I use flattr I wonder if I'm concerned.
You should be. *IMO* your posts are VERY annoying with the "support my
work, give me money money money" below them, sometimes very much looking
to be written just to spread another round of flattr links.
Might not be the int
>> > I even encourage users to use flattr to support free software with one
>> > blog post per month. Is this spam according to you?
>> Do it once in a while for whatever other project and there is not much reason
>> to complain.
> I don't understand. I have recommended 5 projects using Flattr ever
> I have been made aware that people use Debian resources for personal
> financial gain using the planet.d.o syndication platform, by for
> instance including 'flattr' links and images in the text present on
> planet.
> Furthermore there are reports of webbugs in some feeds syndicated on
> planet
Hey world,
as you might know from past mails there had been a short meeting today
where last questions around DebConf12 bids could be dealt with.
The major goal to sort out questions the bid teams might have did not
need to be kicked as they simply do not have any open question
currently. Instead
Heyho,
just a short reminder, next week is the FTPMaster meeting. That means,
limited service from the archive during that week, something along one
install run a day only (except we break too much, then none, but we try
not to :) ).
I'll keep you people updated during the meeting, most probably
> I saw you included most points raised but nothing about XZ support (even
> though it's a relatively small item in term of work compared to the rest).
> I had raised it here:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/02/msg00072.html
> Did you miss it or was this a deliberate omission?
Missed.
Hello world,
[ We got asked how the Debian project (and especially us as delegates
handling the archive) has handled trademarks in the past, and our
opinion on how restrictive Trademark licenses can (or not) lead to DFSG
freeness issues. This topic cooked up with the special example of the
curren
Heyho,
this weekend I added two more lintian rejects:
udeb-uses-non-gzip-data-tarball
This is fatal, not overridable. A udeb shouldn't use anything else than
gzip currently.
bad-perm-for-file-in-etc-sudoers.d
This one can be overriden if need be, but as a wrong permission of a
sudoers file can e
On 12794 March 1977, Francesca Ciceri wrote:
> a recent discussion [1] on Debian Women mailing list made me realize that
> the Debian Project, the *Universal* Operating System, doesn't have a
> diversity statement [2].
Why do we need such a statement? Are we doing something better or worse
with/w
On 12803 March 1977, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think some of this has since gotten simpler and I heard some rumors that
> the US was giving up on even the notification requirement for export of
> open source software, but I haven't been following the details closely.
We don't send the notices to th
On 12873 March 1977, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Do you plan to switch all *.commands to structured syntax as part of
> this change, or do you rather plan to have both structured and oneliner
> syntaxes coexist?
We plan on having it a new extension and let debianqueued ignore it
entirely, as it w
>> >Thanks for your good intention, but please *read* what I write.
>> >I am aware of how to add myself to Planet Debian.
>> >I am unaware of how I purge the broken cache of Planet Debian.
You can't.
The stuff had been in files for 3 categories planet thinks you
ha(ve|d). theater, friends, webca
On 13015 March 1977, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> So I would suggest instead that material "unrelated to Debian", but from
>> people within the broad community, is actually by far the best use for
>> Planet Debian, and that the more relevant posts are to Debian, the less
>> appropriate they are for Plan
On 13015 March 1977, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> AFAIK Matthew Garrett hasn't been "active and directly involved
> participant in the Debian development community" for years. What is the
> reason for keeping his blog on planet.d.o?
Lots of interesting articles, which (more or less directly) touch
Debian.
On 13016 March 1977, Russ Allbery wrote:
> My reviews are pretty long -- I could probably modify the hand-rolled
> software that generates the RSS feed to simulate a cut tag or
> something.
Oh yuck, please don't. Such things are something like the worlds second
most stupid thing ever invented. :)
On 13051 March 1977, MJ Ray wrote:
>> maybe as a mail thread during a quieter period.
> Anyone like to suggest when that quieter period might be?
About a month after a DebConf ended.
--
bye, Joerg
Ubuntu: An ancient african word meaning "I can't configure Debian"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to d
> as we have found a bug in a part of our archive software that might lead
> to remote code execution, we have stopped processing uploads until this
> bug is fixed. We expect that to happen pretty soon, though Thursday is
> more likely to see a fix than the rest of this Wednesday.
And while the m
>> And while the main archive got it turned back on around noon UTC, the
>> other archives just got it back. So all back to normal, nothing to
>> see, go on fixing RC bugs please. :)
> Thanks.
> Do we know if anyone tried exploiting this bug in the past?
I don't think so.
Also, most other arch
On 13053 March 1977, Arno Töll wrote:
>> Thanks for securing it quickly :) Is there any danger of the vulnerable
>> code being in use on other systems, e.g. as part of a dak install?
> Indeed, thanks for fixing the issue so fast.
> But full disclosure FTW. Now, that the problem is fixed please sha
On 13054 March 1977, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
>> All our commits are open and get to the -dak list too.
>> The basic summary is "really old code that needs to be replaced,
>> really". In this case - a possible attack using the help of shell
>> metacharacters by a specially prepared filename due to
On 13054 March 1977, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> That's making another assumption and isn't provable or disprovable.
> Even it is somehow true now, future adopters may start making use of
> it, and they should be aware of past issues to make sure they check
> out a new enough release.
Right. So agai
On 13083 March 1977, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Unfortunately, we are not doing a particularly good job at documenting
> our choices --- in particular: which licenses do we consider free ---
> and at explaining the rationales behind them.
One thing first: The question if we change DFSG and docum
On 13083 March 1977, Bart Martens wrote:
> How would you organize setting up an authoritative and maintained list of
> verified DFSG-free licenses ? Which formal steps would need to be completed
> before an additional license or license version would be added to the list ?
> How to deal with mista
On 13085 March 1977, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> The whole of ftp* agrees that it would be nice to have a place
>> documenting this. So much so that we started something for it in 2009,
>> see http://ftp-master.debian.org/licenses/ for it.
> Oo, that's awesome! I had no idea something lik
On 13102 March 1977, Christoph Egger wrote:
>>> When I encounter a work under CC BY 2.0, I have a hard time explaining
>>> Upstream
>>> why it is strictly necessary to upgrade it to 2.5 or more for their work to
>>> be
>>> distributed in Debian. What are the crucial changes that made CC BY 2.5
> Finally, if someone wants an option to disable avatars in the
> bugreport view, I'd certainly add a patch which did that, or consider
> implementing it myself if an appropriate wishlist bug was filed with
> enough support against the debbugs package.
Not just that, I want an option to disable a
On 13210 March 1977, razvi asder wrote:
> of using Asterisk in Linux distribution. I chose Debian as a Linux
> distribution and first I have to give some arguments for which I have
> chosen this type of distribution. Can you help me to give some
> advantages in using Debian and not to use other ty
Am 03.09.2013 12:04, schrieb Steffen Möller:
It is not just the description but the subscription policy that is
changed. But
my goal is to get some feedback about the idea in general as it
hasn't got much
traction so far. If there is no interest from companies we can
simply close the
list. Bu
Hi
I am pleased to announce that DSA has promoted Héctor Orón Martínez
to a
full member of the team.
Please update the delegation for the Debian System Administrators
accordingly.
I'd rather wait until we see where our current (private) conversation
is
going, as the job description could be u
>> Now, I have no idea how that private discussion looks like, so I can
>> only base my observation on what I see of DSAs works and the old
>> delegation text. Which doesn't look like the role really changed? May
>> I ask what I miss?
> Over the last months, I was contacted by DDs about several i
On 13446 March 1977, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Q1. How much should we push for Debian services (services useful to
> Debian) to be hosted on Debian infrastructure?
A lot.
> Should I authorize the use of Debian money to fund infrastructure not
> managed by DSA, in the case of a useful service that
On 13447 March 1977, Ean Schuessler wrote:
>> 3. to provide a place to experiment with new services
>>+ create a "Debian cloud" with virtual machines to develop new services
>> (maybe providing manually-created VMs would be enough -- I'm not sure
>> we
>> need a complex infra such
On 13501 March 1977, Neil McGovern wrote:
> Each channel that has the group @debian-ops in it's access list receives
> a "/mode +b *!*@*.tor-irc.oftc.net". Those who are registered can ask
> nickserv to provide them with a unique cloak tied to their account, with
> "/msg nickserv set cloak on".
On 13502 March 1977, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
>> /msg chanserv access #debian-WHATEVERCHANNEL @debian-chanop CHANOP
>> /msg chanserv access #debian-WHATEVERCHANNEL @debian-master MASTER
>> -> Add the group to the access list of the channel
> These two should probably be (missing "add"):
> /msg c
On 10502 March 1977, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> As well as the articles, they distribute a DVD with each issue. I asked
> the editor if they would be willing to distribute a Debian DVD. He said
> he had several requests for this before but sarges' 2 DVD size was too big
> and he was loathe to m
On 10622 March 1977, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> And the bigger problem is that people who are ready to become DD may be
> waiting on the AM assignation list while people who are not ready are
> currently learning with the help of an AM whose job should not be to play
> the sponsor of the applicant (
On 10641 March 1977, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> - network stability: oftc annoys with many netsplits lately. This might
> be temporary, but in the last month it was extreme.
No, some were there, but not more than in Feenode.
> - nickserv/chanserv services differ. I'm receiving the expression
>
[This is a mail to multiple lists, please only reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], thanks. (Headers should be set for it).]
Dear Mirror-Admin,
we are looking for servers around the world for the streaming video
service of this years DebConf6 in Mexico, where we will (try to) provide
live streaming of the
On 10643 March 1977, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> > or indicating their status with nicknames (which also spams the
>> > channel). You also get spammed on IRC whenever someone joins or
>> > leaves a channel.
>> Most IRC clients allow those to be switched off. Personally, I happen to
>> like them.
> s/m
On 10708 March 1977, Daniel J. Priem wrote:
> i need colocation for some machines.
> Since my 64HE here are filled with 82HE of Hardware i can no more hosts
> place here. But still i have some new incoming engines.
> I am also at the end of physical possible bandwith.
And as he missed to write th
On 10729 March 1977, martin f. krafft wrote:
> also sprach Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.28.1737 +0100]:
>> If Debian had slightly less of a culture of "Keep your hands off
>> my package", I'd do it here instead.
> I've been thinking about this a lot for the past week.
> Is there an
On 10729 March 1977, MJ Ray wrote:
>> Simply change the NMUs to be always 0-day, for all bugs >=3Dnormal. Which
>> means - upload and mail to BTS at the same time.
> Would that mean we get BTS+NMU tennis instead of BTS tennis,
> where differences of opinion over what is a serious bug result
> in 0
On 10736 March 1977, Andreas Barth wrote:
> After some more of the feedback, I decided to remove it from
> PlanetDebian. That same reason should IMHO also apply to removing the
> DebConf Blog (and not adding one for DebConf 7) and permanently removing
> DWN from PlanetDebian.
In future please do
Hi
this night I updated bpo to use the latest dak version, which means it
now has the ~ support. If you spot any errors (like someone already did
once this morning) please mail me or contact me on irc.oftc.net channel
#debian-backports (nick Ganneff).
If you are uploading packages this also means
On 10783 March 1977, Miguel Gea Milvaques wrote:
> According to the minutes from the meeting on 2006-09-09 [1], it seems
> that the candidate dates for Debconf7 lie in the middle of June. For
> some of us, this is a problem, as June is probably one of the most
> problematic months for going for ma
On 10804 March 1977, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>>From my observations, is seems that the only persons who can judge about
> these questions are the current DAMs (James and Joerg), and perhaps the
> DPL, since only they can approve new members of FD and DAM. (Given that
> I understand the current pra
On 10818 March 1977, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 11:29:48AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> I'm withdrawing the "Package Policy Committee" delegation made by Branden
>> in June last year, in:
>> ...
> Would you care to tell us why?
Simple to answer - Manoj has a different opini
Hi,
After a long and ambivalent discussion during the last weeks the project
"Dunc Tank" (short DT from now on) has recently started. We consider
that to be a major change to the Debian project culture: For the first
time Debian Developers are paid for their work on Debian by a
institution so nea
On 10830 March 1977, Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, the problem is more complicated than you think. There are many issues at
> hand here, the first being that i have a right to have svn access, because of
And thats the point you get wrong. No, you dont "have a right to have
svn access". You have the
On 10830 March 1977, Sven Luther wrote:
>> And thats the point you get wrong. No, you dont "have a right to have
>> svn access". You have the right to fork d-i and run your own, but no
>> right to demand you get access to anything anywhere.
> Why don't have i a right to get access ? I am a DD as m
Hi
Please respect Reply-To/Mail-Followup-To, which is set to
debconf-team@lists.debconf.org, thanks.
As people who followed the recent Call for Papers/Registration for
DebConf7 may have seen we are now using a new system (Pentabarf) to manage the
attendees and talks. This system is written in Ru
Hi
I have a number of machines to give away to Debian related people.
This is "old" hardware donated from Lufthansa, ranging from an older
486DX2/66 to new Dual Xeon 3GHz machines. All machines that nobody wants
here will get scrapped, so I haven't done a selection, maybe someone
wants to build a
On 10860 March 1977, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> So, if you want a machine from the following list, send a mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and give a rough description what you plan to do with
> it.
Hihi, Update: Please notice that the list contains more than those 4
Dual Xeon machines. Mayb
On 10940 March 1977, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> - delegated authority to determine unofficial Debian services via
>> delegation
>>of debian.net subdomains
> Hasn't debian.net DNS management delegated to others?
Yes and no. DSA is responsible for keeping it running, and they can
freely
On 10944 March 1977, Gustavo Franco wrote:
>> I disagree. RT has a very flexible and complex ACL management which
>> lacks in BTS. So it can be potentially used to to ensure public view of some
>> information without full disclosure.
> I know and use RT daily. I've asked use-cases where we need to
On 10944 March 1977, Gustavo Franco wrote:
>> I disagree. RT has a very flexible and complex ACL management which
>> lacks in BTS. So it can be potentially used to to ensure public view of some
>> information without full disclosure.
> I know and use RT daily. I've asked use-cases where we need to
1 - 100 of 199 matches
Mail list logo
