Daniel Pocock pocock.pro> writes:
> Literally, "open source" implies you can see the source. I personally
The correct term for *that* is “shared source”, though.
“Open Source” means that it’s got an OSD-conformant licence
plus that you actually get the source code under that licence.
“OSI cer
Anthony Towns erisian.com.au> writes:
> don't think it's as feasible:
>
> - if cpan/pypi/etc change their formats and the conversion scripts need
>updating, it'd have to be done on every system, rather than in one
>place
- additional build-depends and depends cannot be expressed upstre
Tollef Fog Heen err.no> writes:
> This means that if you use system packages and want to have two
> applications that both want foo.jar installed, but different versions
> (since they need different APIs or different bug compatibility), we
> don't support that well. For C libraries, there are so
Steve Langasek dixit:
>DFSG #8 is not an issue. DFSG #4 allows authors to require changed versions
>of their software to be distributed under a different name. If the upstream
>makes special allowances for Debian to use the name for modified versions,
>this doesn't fail the DFSG, because everyon
Hi *,
please compare
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2013/02/msg00141.html
with, for example,
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2013/02/msg00140.html
and tell me whether you’re seeing what I am seeing:
• As, apparently (he’s done it for bind9 and util-linux too) normal
f
LaMont Jones dixit:
>mergechanges is responsible for the differences you're seeing:
[…]
>uploaded (again from the ubuntu system, but the bits are firmly cast on sid.)
OK, thanks for the explanation.
>least one of those buildds has bitten me with bad binaries in the past.
Hm. I think that’s no r
Sune Vuorela vuorela.dk> writes:
> What's the problem here ?
It’s a trust question. If something differs, people wonder why.
If something broke in the past, people are more wary.
The answer showed that there’s nothing to worry except for the
maintainer address merge failure, though (this is why
Russ Allbery debian.org> writes:
> Just for the future, could folks try to avoid subject lines like this? It
> comes across as a call-out, which sets things off on a confrontational
Oh, okay. Sorry.
> LaMont handled it very well, and not everyone is bothered by it, but it
> seems like an unnec
Hi *,
I think we had a discussion about it but can’t find it any more.
But I saw on SO a link to inform at least one of the search engines
about reporting “scraper pages” that occur before the “real” pages:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGM4TXhIOFd3c1hZR2NHUDN
1NmllU0E6MQ&n
the living hell out of
ksh93 in that respect. I'd even consider it for my daily use if I hadn't
wasted half my life on my zsh setup. :-) -- Frank Terbeck in #!/bin/mksh#!/bin/mksh
#-
# Copyright (c) 2013
# Thorsten Glaser
#
# Provided that these terms and disclaimer and all copyr
Dixi quod…
>got 328 signatures in total, 319 keys signed in total
>expect this to be 329 and 319, respectively
Ah actually this is because 70096AD1 is not unique, and
Zack has signed both of them. (I assume Asheesh generated
the newer key to have the same ID as the older – not nice…
but the stati
Jonathan Dowland dixit:
>On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 12:56:37PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>> Seems as though Joey is already taking the lead on this:
>>
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/debmirror.git;a=commitdiff;h=fcd972395b0201fcde4915d282982926f0d04c56;hp=7fcdf0d225c480b386
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Inevitably, the CoC will be voted on in a GR. The right time to
> continue this dogpile is in the vote.
Mh… we’ll see how that turns out.
> Norbert Preining writes ("Re: Code of Conduct: picking up"):
> > Why don't we try to be *honest*, something like
fup2p
On Thu, 28 Nov 2013, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> You mean you were using Debian resources to spread malware, and it seems
You’re ridiculous. That’s not malware and cannot spread either
(except like the famous “hi, I’m a signature virus, copy me to
your .sig to help me spread”, are you forbidd
>«Malware, short for malicious software, is software used to disrupt
See. This isnât software. It is a perfectly valid string of
Unicode characters.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas
Followup-To: poster
Paul Tagliamonte dixit:
>"Valid" is a subjective term :)
Mh, true. Anyway, I’m not using that signature any more,
and I’m reading most Debian lists through GMane anyway,
*and* (yes Enrico) I’ve re-read the DMUP (though that one
is shaky too, but I understand the spirit). EOT.
Ian Jackson chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> (The main program I'm thinking of here is a Ruby on Rails
> application.) What are people's feelings about AGPLv3 ?
Completely beyond licencing (I’m firm on the BSD side of things ofc):
It has recently been “discovered” (i.e. the implications f
Moritz Mühlenhoff inutil.org> writes:
> Kurt Roeckx roeckx.be> schrieb:
> > The rules seem to suggest that we need a priority important bug
So, if I have one, I can include the relevant bugfix?
> > So I have the impression that if upstream has a stable branch and
> > really only do bug fixes
ore or less. I want to fix a few non-security bugs first
(see below for that), and once that has hit stable, will
want to follow up with upstream 1.19.x LTS uploads but
no further non-security changes, unless they are RC or
otherwise important.
On Tue, 31 Dec 2013, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>
Hi *,
I’ve just saw DUCK reporting an issue with mediawiki (and, following
a quick grep, most of the packages using svn on Alioth):
(Note: word-wrapped so the GMane Loom would accept this newspost.)
tglase@tglase:~ $ svn ls svn://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-mediawiki/
svn: E210005: Unable to connect
Paul Wise debian.org> writes:
> This got broken relatively recently and the alioth admins haven't yet
> fixed it, bug report here:
OK, thanks for the pointer.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contac
Raymond gmail.com> writes:
> focuses on the freedom of the users, while the definition of the
> open source movement uses the word "free" only in the context of
> money, but never in the context of freedom for the user. The
Ehm, you’re looking too narrowly. Do not restrict reading th
Hi,
wouldn't it be possible to at least make the en_US.UTF-8 locale forcibly
generated, so that it can't be deselected by dpkg-reconfigure locales?
If this one isn't installed, many apps break when I ssh from an OS that
uses exclusively UTF-8 to a Debian box.
Thanks!
//mirabile
--
I believe no
martin f krafft dixit:
>Why en_US? Why not en_GB?
Because how many applications come with en_US data files and how
many speak proper English? I know it's sad, but it happens to be
like this.
>> If this one isn't installed, many apps break when I ssh from an OS that
>> uses exclusively UTF-8 to a
martin f krafft dixit:
>also sprach Thorsten Glaser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.06.16.1323 +0100]:
>> Funnily I cannot if I'm not root. And I've seen etch boxen where
>> en_US.UTF-8 was not installed.
>
>Then please bug the admin.
That's what I did, but th
martin f krafft dixit:
>Please stop CCing debian-project.
I don't.
>Does a C.UTF-8 exist? If yes, then this is a sound proposal,
>I think.
If not, one could probably easily create one. It would have to
have all properties of C except for LC_CTYPE, which it would
have to take from en_US.UTF-8.
Roger Leigh dixit:
>> Does a C.UTF-8 exist? If yes, then this is a sound proposal,
>> I think.
>
>I believe that the "C" locale is supposed to be US_ASCII only.
That applies to “C” but not to a hypothetical “C.UTF-8” locale,
which would have to be set via setlocale(3) anyway, and differ
from “C”
Mike Hommey dixit:
>> it's not. We could create a neutral.utf-8 locale for sure
Sounds like a plan. Maybe something short and uppercase, akin to
"C" and "POSIX", how about "STD.UTF-8"?
>> but a
>> C.utf-8 is really bad, because some programs check the locale for 'C'
>> and when they foind that
On Fri, 7 Feb 2025, Sam Johnston wrote:
>On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 at 08:48, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>>
>> I’d like to remind you that these huge binary blobs still contain,
>> in lossily compressed form, illegally obtained and unethically
>> pre-prepared, copies of copyrighte
M. Zhou dixit:
>I do not see how proposal A harms the ecosystem. It just prevents huge
>binary blobs from entering Debian's main section of the archive. It
>does not stop people from uploading the binary blobs to non-free
>section.
I’d like to remindyou that these huge binary blobs still contain,
30 matches
Mail list logo
