Package: lists.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
Hello,
with the adoption of the code of conduct, more and more people started
to respond to persons who do not follow its spirit, to let them know
that the message was inappropriate in one way or another. Some do it
publicly and other do it privately.
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Brian Gupta wrote:
> As someone who's pretty heavily involved in fundraising for Debian, I'd like
> to
> express my support for adding Paypal to the list of official methods to donate
> to Debian.
And if I can add a data point, PayPal is already mentioned on the donation
page
On Tue, 01 Dec 2015, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Could Debian as a project sign up ? Conservancy is a 503(c), like
> SPI, so perhaps we in Debian could commit a modest regular funding
> stream to Conservancy.
+1
We have troubles finding good use of our money. This one should not
cause any problem to an
Hi,
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> So, it appears as if currently nobody has time or the energy to take
> care of httpredir.debian.org properly.
>
> I suggest we shut down the service for now. If, at some future point,
> somebody wants to maintain again we can always start it up a
Hi,
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Christian Rohmann wrote:
> It does wonderful things (http://mirrorbrain.org/features/):
Nice to see some much support but I would like to point out that not
everything is perfect either...
> * Load-Balance by GeoIP / AS matching (traffic stays very local)
That's clearl
On Thu, 14 Apr 2016, Christian Rohmann wrote:
> On 04/13/2016 10:23 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >> * Intensive checks (even via rsync) regarding mirror consistency
> > That's good too but the downside is that the mirrors must
> > offer rsync service, either publ
On Fri, 02 Dec 2016, Holger Levsen wrote:
> I'm not saying people like you dont exist, nor that your reasoning aint
> sensible. I've just said some people take motivation from being listed
> as maintainer.
We could get rid of "Maintainer" in debian/control and still display
on tracker.debian.org t
On Thu, 08 Dec 2016, Guillem Jover wrote:
> It is not only not obviously right to me, instead it seems obvious
> it carries a set of different problems with it. I feel this carries
> so many assumptions of how the proposers feel about how *they* work
> or might like to work and ignores how *others*
Hi,
On Tue, 05 Sep 2017, Paul Wise wrote:
> I discussed this a bit more with Stéphane Blondon offlist and we came
> up with this proposal for the criteria and how to list derivatives.
>
> We would welcome some feedback on these new criteria.
I don't have anything to add. It looks good to me (and
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > This implies to me that, at the least, "anti-harassment" is the wrong
> > name for a team that deals with this.
>
> That's certainly true. I thought of these ideas:
What about def...@debian.org ?
You write to them when you are about to explode and nee
Hi,
On Fri, 21 Dec 2018, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Thank you for illustrating so well why Daniel's words were spot on. Your
> response is exactly why censorship must not be tolerated in Debian.
Such a message is not constructive and actually hurts any further
discussion. First of all, while it may
On Wed, 03 Jul 2019, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 05:33:25PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> > Being german, I think that Debian should honor discriminated minorities,
>
> Being a discriminated against minority, I think Debian should *not*.
And since Debian is do-ocracy, it's
Hi,
On Sun, 29 Sep 2019, Hector Oron wrote:
> > Not sure what the problem with LTS is. I thought companies pay for the
> > extra effort. I think it's a perfectly fine business model.
>
> As a very simple summary, companies pay another company (Debian
> unrelated) to use Debian volunteers time and
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, Gerardo Ballabio wrote:
> > That is, the team would rule on individual cases, rather than issuing
> > "lists of things not to do". IMHO that pretty much would make it a
> > court with the power to judge project members. And I'm not
On Mon, 13 Apr 2020, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hell, there's a strong confirmation bias here too - how many
> potentially great future developers have we lost at a very early stage
> because our email-centric workflow didn't appeal to them initially?
We already lost existing Debian developers due to
Hello Antonio,
nice initiative !
On Thu, 21 May 2020, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> For services, my starting point is https://wiki.debian.org/Services For
> tools, I currently have a list of the ones I usually contribute to, but
> can add more.
>
> Not the part where I need your help. I'm looking f
Hello,
as you probably know, my company — Freexian — has been running the
commercial side of the Debian LTS project, collecting money from sponsors
and dispatching it to contributors handling the security updates. This is
working pretty well by now and the amount of funding is sufficient to
cover
Hi,
On Fri, 02 Apr 2021, Phil Morrell wrote:
> I've thought about what such a system could look like, perhaps signed
> commits to a salsa project or a simple site like mentors. I came to the
> conclusion that there's already a working system in place for counting
> DD support of suggestions. debia
Hi,
On Sun, 04 Apr 2021, Phil Morrell wrote:
> Please keep in mind that I'm proposing this list purely as a practical
> experiment, it does nothing that can't already be done elsewhere, and if
> it doesn't work out after say 6 months, then so be it. All I'm looking
> for is an indication that it w
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021, Phil Morrell wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 10:14:50PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > We could have a "debian/spending-ideas" if you want so that all DD have
> > write access by default. We could restrict access to issues for project
> &
On Sun, 14 Nov 2021, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Three folks on -vote recently responded to a GR proposal that we—as a
> group—have more important things to do, yet no one articulated what
> those things were. With this message, I hope to collect your ideas.
[...]
> Please feel free to respond
On Mon, 24 Jan 2022, Jeremiah C. Foster wrote:
> You can find a draft of the survey here:
> https://salsa.debian.org/freexian-team/misc-drafts/-/blob/master/2022-dd-survey/survey-content.md
FTR, thanks to the feedback of Ulrike Uhlig, I merged some changes
compared to the initial version that was
Hello,
I have received some private feedback that a few questions were heavily
biased towards technical roles. That bias is certainly real as this is where
I come from and the kind of work that I'd like to fund with Freexian is
mostly technical.
That said the survey would certainly be more useful
Hello,
On Mon, 24 Jan 2022, Jeremiah C. Foster wrote:
> To this end we are currently preparing a survey. We expect to use
> surveys.debian.net (Limesurvey) to generate private links that can be sent
> to each Debian developer. (This is so that only Debian developers can fill
> out the survey.) Onc
Hello,
ever since I created the Alioth collab-maint project [1], I have been adding
non-developers to the project so that they can work together with
other DD (sponsors) on a common VCS. 359 requests have been approved since
2005, it currently amounts to 5 to 20 requests every month. The threshold
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Jeremiah Foster wrote:
> > Are there volunteers for the task?
>
> I would be willing to volunteer as part of a team. I work with the
> debian-perl team and find that group maintenance and co-operation makes
> things function quite smoothly. I would like to mention I am not a D
Hi,
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Xavier Oswald wrote:
> > Is there an existing team that could take this responsibility? [2]
> > Are there volunteers for the task?
>
> Why a team ? People volunteers registered as Admin could do the needed job
> right ?
I asked for a team because it would not be unreaso
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, Enrico Zini wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:45:32PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> > Now I would like to stop dealing with those requests and thus I would like
> > a team of people to replace me.
>
> Do you have a way to know what percentage o
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Why not automatically include all DMs in the collab-maint group?
No objection from me. But I don't know how to map DM to alioth accounts.
> And to drive the idea further, what about a public-maint group that
> everyone with an alioth account can commit
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, Enrico Zini wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:45:32PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> > Now I would like to stop dealing with those requests and thus I would like
> > a team of people to replace me.
>
> Do you have a way to know what percentage o
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> On 06/07/10 10:09, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
>
>
> AFAICT, none of this justifies silently removing someone from the NM
> database.
I can't speak for the NM team, but if he was asked to go through DM first
(and that's what I understood), I could under
Hi,
On Tue, 17 Aug 2010, Steffen Möller wrote:
> there is a new advent on the Internet horizon which is the social
> micropayment. Regular web users pay in some money and distribute that
> with respect to their clicks in the web. I feel that Debian should
> somehow participate with that, i.e. we s
Hi,
On Thu, 02 Sep 2010, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I admit that I personally can not spend the (spare) time which is needed
> to work on or even lead a project like debian-installer but I would like
> to raise the awareness of people here by showing the figure above that
> especially in freeze time a
Hi Joerg,
thanks for those minutes, they were very interesting. I like that you're
working on integrating more stuff on the main archive. It's definitely
better than to have many separate archives. I do hope backports will be
a suite on the main archive at some point.
I have one comment and a que
Hi,
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010, Henri Le Foll wrote:
> I have seen that Raphael Hertzog has written a blog entrie about conffile
> so I have created http://wiki.debian.org/Training
This article is more oriented towards users than towards contributors. But
I have other articles that are interesti
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010, Holger Levsen wrote:
> since a while, we see unsolicted commercial links and images on planet,
> mostly
> about flattr.
This definition does not make it clear what you're targeting.
Can you be more precise? Since I use flattr I wonder if I'm concerned.
I even encourag
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Where I personally draw the line is that I'm fairly comfortable with
> Debian-involved people advertising their own services on Planet Debian:
> their own companies, their own consulting services, their own posts, and
> so forth. I would start gettin
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> 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 intention, but feels li
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > For some value of "any". Planet has a big audience, articles are seen by
> > more than 3 persons so it's difficult to speak for them.
>
> How do you get that number?
Feedburner statistics. But I was wrong, it's not that many. That numbers
includes
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I'm not particularly happy with the 'flattr this' buttons either. My
> main problem is that I find quite difficult to avoid interpreting them
> as DMUP violations, specifically about DMUP point "don't use Debian
> Facilities for private financia
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> My next question for you (assuming you accept that a discussion on this
> list is enough to decide on this matter---I personally do) is whether
> you find that my summary of this thread, given in my former post, is
> fair or not.
I don't know o
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010, Holger Levsen wrote:
> since a while, we see unsolicted commercial links and images on planet,
> mostly
> about flattr.
So it's now clear that this thread is only about flattr buttons. Quite a few
people explained that they are (at varying level) annoyed by them. I woul
Hi,
(I'm hert...@d.o and not b...@d.o)
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> What Can I Post On Planet?
[...]
> - Be very careful including material from external sites (ie, not your
>own blog/domain). The occasional picture from elsewhere is fine, but
>anything that can be (or i
Hi,
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> It's not begging in a sense that someone IS doing some work. It's more
> like "use this thing that I produced, and if you want, you can reward
> me with a few cents". There simply is nothing distasteful about that.
> In fact, I find it courage
Hi Jörg,
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> Compared to my last post about this meeting, we did rework our agenda a
> little bit, so it currently reads like the stuff I paste below. We
> guarantee nothing from it, but we try to at least have a few short words
> about each. Well, a report
Hi,
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> multi-arch implementation, see
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/02/msg00504.html
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:44:46PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > Compared to my last post about this meeting,
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Jose Luis Rivas wrote:
> If is proposed to GR as it is written now, I will most probably vote
> against it too. I thought the diversity statement was to let everybody
> know they were welcome to work in the project, not that they have to
> think in certain way nor we will have
On Fri, 06 Apr 2012, Enrico Zini wrote:
> I love how this is increasing in awesomeness as it is decreasing in
> size.
Indeed.
> I feel like suggesting two minor patches, labor limae if anything:
>
> s/contributions to Debian/contributions/
> s/expertise in other areas/expertise in other areas,
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013, Paul Wise wrote:
> > The source package control files and some of their derivatives are
> > currently
> > used to document the URL of the home page of the work that is packaged
> > ("upstream"). However, this approach is hard to extend to other
> > information
> > descri
Hi,
On Wed, 06 Feb 2013, LaMont Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 11:33:39AM -0700, LaMont Jones wrote:
> > mergechanges is responsible for the differences you're seeing:
> > dpkg-source is run (yes, on an ubuntu system), and then binaries are built
> > on a system that is running sid, both a
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:12:12AM +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
> > I didn't really understand your proposal, it was missing the "What?"
> > section. What do you intend to change apart from the description of
> > the debian-companies list?
>
> It is not just
Hi,
On Sat, 04 Jan 2014, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I've given some thought to this myself, and came up with the following
> ideas. Some of them are probably really bad ideas, but let's try to
> brainstorm a bit:
I don't find them bad. At least from the POV of view of a DD and of a
service mainta
On Mon, 06 Jan 2014, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois writes ("Re: Updating the Policy Editors delegation"):
> > Have you seen some mistakes that would help us (or at least me)
> > understand which problems you're {thinking of,anticipating}?
>
> I think the biggest problem isn't that the polic
On Mon, 06 Jan 2014, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes:
>
> > This is all very well but I think de jure they aren't a delegated team,
> > and the distinction is defined in the constitution. This is not
> > trivially bypassable, because a delegated team is one who derives their
> > powers
Hi,
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> So, first things first, I would welcome your feedback on the TO
> criterias[1]. Soft deadline: 2014-02-01.
> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DPL/TrustedOrganizationCriteria
I didn't find anything really problematic in the criteria, at least not
w
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> - [bgupta] work with SPI to enable donations via paypal
Note that Debian France has planned to setup that for the Debian project.
It would be a small change on this page:
https://france.debian.net/galette/plugins/galette-plugin-paypal/paypal_form.php
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > 2) the alternative is that they give up on the idea, or host it
> >themselves, which makes it harder to work collaboratively on the
> >service, and results in services that have a single maintainer (or
> >none, in the end).
>
> How does h
Hi,
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, Ingo Jürgensmann wrote:
> Unfortunately I have a problem with the renaming of my pet service
> Buildd.Net on https://wiki.debian.org/Services. I added my service as
> BuilddNet and it got renamed to "UnofficialBuilddNet". Although it's
> true that it's an unofficial servic
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, Ingo Jürgensmann wrote:
> In fact it doesn't duplicate an existing service. Its focus is
> different than the buildd.d.o site.
The site says “These pages are intended to show additional information to
http://buildd.debian.org or more exactly it is basically the same
informatio
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Ian Jackson wrote:
> It can increase security because it can make operations more
> convenient at the same level of security, and because people trade off
> convenience for security.
>
> For example, it would be possible to have one key for email encryption
> and a different (
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > - Wrap your lines at 80 characters or less for ordinary discussion. Lines
> > longer than 80 characters are acceptable for computer-generated output
> > (e.g., ls -l).
> > - Do not send automated out-of-office or vacation messages.
> > - Do not send
Hi Solveig,
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014, Solveig wrote:
> I can write specific amendments, if somebody is willing to sponsor them :)
Please do. I tend to agree with what Steve said. It doesn't hurt to have a
list of "don't" but this should not replace the "inspirational" part of the
CoC.
Cheers,
--
Rap
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> The danger of having a list of "do not"s is that people will do
> something which is not on the list, and then point to it and say "see,
> it's allowed by the code of conduct" when pointed out that they're being
> a dick.
It's quite common to have an s
Le lundi 12 décembre 2005 à 16:02 -0500, David Nusinow a écrit :
> The result of this leads me to believe that most of the famed integration
> going on in Ubuntu is the result of the eye-catching theme, the choice of a
> single default desktop, and good marketing. I had hoped to install Ubuntu
> on
Hello,
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:55:45PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > They could just as well do their changes directly in the debian archive, and
> > have the ubuntu guys only recompile, or maintain the ubuntu-specific patches
> > which should *not* go into debian. That is provided the deb
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 04:58:40PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >> Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> > I'm quickly losing interest in discussing this with you at all, to be
> >> >
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > FWIW, what you say is false and *many* developers are interested in
> > cooperation, not in war.
> >
> > And Ubuntu is doing far more for us than most other derivatives that we
> > ever had.
>
> Provide evidence, please.
Please don't reply to private e
[ Reply-to debian-project ]
Hi everybody,
given the size of the project, it's very difficult for any of us to
evaluate the popularity of random ideas/opinions in a short time frame.
Jeroen (jvw) recently conducted two informal polls (vi-tiny vs elvis, and
maintainer field for ubuntu) and I liked
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> The result of the polls could eventually be used by the listmasters to
> take action if needed.
So "eventually" is not what I meant, but rather "possibly" (it's a
"faux-amis", a bad translation from french
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta wrote:
> > Those polls are not fully crafted GR so they are not as binding as a GR
> > could be but they should give up a pretty good overview of the current
> > opinion inside the project (if each poll has been well prepared by its
> > proponent).
>
>
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta wrote:
> > It's just an idea that I wanted to share because I believe that we need to
> > do
> > something to reduce the level of flames on our lists. I'm always open to
> > better ideas.
>
> I just wanted to express that such a system, no matter how
Hi,
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, MJ Ray wrote:
> I think making these official is a terrible idea because it
> would change an interesting experimental data-collection method
> into a tool for more summary mob-rule decisions by delegates,
> which have been the worst sort of decision IMO.
The constitution
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, MJ Ray wrote:
> > [...] I also believe that the delegate will most of
> > the time make up their own opinions and won't blindly follow the majority
> > if they (belive they) have grounded objections.
>
> How does that differ from the current situation: relying on a
> delegate'
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, MJ Ray wrote:
> > [...] By officializing, I only mean :
> > - let the DD know that they have the possibility to use "polls" [...]
> > - be able to use d-d-a for those polls
>
> As a DD, jvw could already use d-d-a for those polls. Maybe the
> first poll there could ask where t
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, MJ Ray wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, MJ Ray wrote: [...]
> > > I think ignored minorities are just as entitled to [reasons] as
> > > ignored majorities. Number of believers doesn't help [...]
&
On Wed, 08 Mar 2006, Joey Hess wrote:
> The main annoying thing about announcing installer betas is that it doesn't
> seem entirely proper to post them to debian-announce, and posting to
Why ? When you look back at the history of debian-announce (check 1998 for
example), we used to use that list m
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, David Nusinow wrote:
> system of governance take over." Fundamentally, this could have happened at
> any time with any of the problematic discussions of the past, but it didn't
> because no developer stepped up to make this decision.
And because a full-fledge GR is a lot of wo
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, David Nusinow wrote:
> > That's also the logic of my proposal of having more "polls":
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/02/msg00065.html
> > (just ignore the "social pressure" idea also elaborated in the same mail,
> > it's definitely not a good one)
>
> The prob
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> 1) Someone who maintains a certain number of packages, but they are
> all sponsored by the same person. This person might be doing a lot of
> work, and be knowledgeable about Debian without interacting actively
> with anyone else apart from his/her
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> I strongly disagree that 2.3 is a long-term thing. It should be
> started years ago, but it isn't too late yet. We should push it with a
> transition plan in mind (e.g: what we're going to do with the people
> that is already waiting for DAM?), but the t
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> Isn't this almost equivalent of giving them their Account directly
> and ask them to get any new package reviewed by someone else?
> (As there is nothing to avoid their build rules or maintainer scripts to
> do dangerous stuff, so from the risk-view th
Hi Kevin,
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Kevin Mark wrote:
> Hi Margarita,
> tracking contributions:
> when someone (like a non-debian package maintainer or a NM) asks for
> something to be sponsored, is there a mailing list or location (like on
> wiki.d.o/$NAME) that this is noted?
There's no centralized
Hi,
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> perhaps able to fix most of the problems. Please note that this is *my*
> opinion, not something decided by the NM team.
Thanks for starting this discussion !
> Quite a lot of applicants are frustrated by the NM process. The reason
> for t
[ Why the crosspost ? I responded only on -project since that where's Marc
pointed the mail followup to ]
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 10622 March 1977, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> > And the bigger problem is that people who are ready to become DD may be
>
erson signing the
.changes is the one that must be listed in the changelog so the sponsored
upload would be done this way:
* Sponsoring upload for
*
-- Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ...
I don't think the DM concept should end the sponsorship idea. But I do
like to have a
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060412 12:33]:
> > I believe many people would be happy with the right to upload only some
> > specific packages. I know for example a TeX expert who'd like to
> > maintaine s
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Well, the idea has been proposed some times now. It has its advantages,
> but there are still some problems - updating a page on wiki.d.o takes
> time [1], so they tend to become outdated.
If it becomes outdated, then the applicant has to update
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> I know that he, FD, DAM and perhaps a few others DD will read all these
> mail. But I would be very disappointed if these data become public
> even if restricted to all DD.
Why ? You should trust other DD if you're going to be part of Debian. If
you sh
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> > like your studies (beeing in a computer science PhD/MSC "helps"),
> Well this might be interesting for the Debian project, but applicants
> might not want this to become public knowledge. Please do not assume,
> that this is for any particular reason
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > It's a pain to have to use gpg to discover who sponsored the upload.
>
> You already know that by looking at the GPG signature.
If you read what I wrote (I just kept the relevant line) ... you will see
that I know that. But it's a pain to have to grab t
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I do, just as I do for every one of my own packages. If you
> don't. perhaps you should consider lowering your burden so you can
> have time for such a basic security check.
It's been a long time since I last sponsored someone, so I was not
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Panu Kalliokoski wrote:
> requiring the packaging and making available of open source software to
> be a hierarchic, rigid process, we are essentially taking that freedom
> away.
You can create (Debian) packages outside of Debian if you're not happy
with Debian.
> One could a
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > If you read what I wrote (I just kept the relevant line) ... you will see
> > that I know that. But it's a pain to have to grab the .changes file and
> > run gpg on it.
>
> Just to pick one I happened to recently sponsor:
> http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > The bigger we get, the more difficult it is to follow that everybody is
> > behaving in accordance to our rules, and the more important it is to give
> > only
> > the rights that someone need.
>
> I'm not opposed to finer grained permissions for pa
Hi,
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > Saying we want more people doing general QA work will not create those
> > people. Refusing help on specific package because some people do not want
> > to go through NM to maintain a very limited package is dumb:
>
> I think it is dump to make
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > We'll never tell that! We just tell "we trust you to maintain
> > according to our standards but since you didn't went (yet) through
> > full NM, we don't trust you on working on anything you'd want".
>
> Err, I am not sure we do say that.
On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, Christoph Berg wrote:
> As I said on IRC, I would be interested myself to have such a central
> place to store my NM communication. What I don't want is any tool that
> would be used to check if a particular AM is inactive, slacking,
> unresponsive etc. Every AM whom I've asked
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Panu Kalliokoski wrote:
> Now seriously, the reasons why a package in Debian is quite different
> from a Debian package outside of Debian should be well-known enough:
> ease of search and use for users and infrastructure for packaging (such
> as the BTS).
We all agree on this
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
> One thing that I think would be interesting is to separate many of the
> projects into teams -- eg, projects from debian-release, debian-installer,
> debian-edu, debian-women, etc.
>
> > [2] http://wiki.debian.org/SummerOfCode2006
>
> Please add ideas t
On Wed, 03 May 2006, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >I'm in favour as well.
> I wonder, do you and the other "me too" people also have a reason to
> justify switching?
Yes I'm tired to have #debian-devel-fr on both networks with less than 30
people on each. The people who are
1 - 100 of 267 matches
Mail list logo
