CALL FOR VOTES
(2 of 2)
Votes must be received by July 7, 1999 15:59:59 -8
This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution. For
voting questions only contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] Details about the
proposal can be found in
On Thu, Jul 01, 1999 at 11:43:10AM -0600, Bruce Sass wrote:
> A few thought from a non-developer with an interest in Debian's product;
> ending with a question/suggestion directed to RMS.
>
> Is it Debian GNU/Linux or GNU Debian/Linux.
Debian GNU/Linux, why do you ask? It's stated everywhere.
>
"Jason" == Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jason> There is a high chance that we will use samosa.d.o for the new
Jason> server, samosa is the emergancy backup ftp.d.o server and will
Jason> also probably be the CD image server, thus it needs to have an
Jason> ftpable copy of the archi
On Thu, 1 Jul 1999, Richard Braakman wrote:
> You asked for comments about the text, not the issues, and I tried to
> honour that.
Thanks! I'm made all the gramatical changes you pointed out..
> As one of the current archive maintainers, I can confirm that I have
> no interest in maintaining an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Jun 30, Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >A few months ago, I think someone mentioned that some packages were in
> >contrib because their quality or utility was marginal, even though
> >they had no dependence on non-free software. If t
On Jun 30, Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>A few months ago, I think someone mentioned that some packages were in
>contrib because their quality or utility was marginal, even though
>they had no dependence on non-free software. If that is true, those
Some packages are in contrib b
A few thought from a non-developer with an interest in Debian's product;
ending with a question/suggestion directed to RMS.
Is it Debian GNU/Linux or GNU Debian/Linux.
The former indicates that Debian is an entity, with its own agenda and
methodology, based on the GNU tools and the Linux kernel.
You asked for comments about the text, not the issues, and I tried to
honour that.
Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> --- Cut -
> This text is a negative response to the non-free split proposal currently
> being deliberated by the Debian Project. It attempts to summarize the
> concerns
Hi,
Frasnkly, asking for controversial topics to be discussed here
would probably increase the volume of this list, and possibly make it
hard for some people to continue to be subscribed (just like what
happened to -devel).
>>"Darren" == Darren O Benham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
D
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 10:30:29PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Fine. I had figureds that -vote would be related to the vote
> process, but if you wish to clutter up this mailing list with
> general discussions
Like I said, I really don't care where the actual discussion is held. I
Hi,
>>"Darren" == Darren O Benham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Darren> On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 02:24:54PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> a) All general resolutions must start with an announcement to
>> debian-devel-announce and debian-devel, with foolow ups
>> redirected to -devel.
Darren
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 05:33:40PM -0700, Chris Waters wrote:
> Not at all true! He was, IIRC, perfectly happy with the suggestion
> that non-free repositories be listed in source.list as long as they
> were commented out *by default* -- or even commented out only if
> someone responded "yes" to a
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Richard wants us to remove non-free software from our main servers,
> remove all mention of non-free software from our web pages, and remove
> mention of non-free software from our installation and config files.
Not at all true! He was, IIRC, perfectly
13 matches
Mail list logo
