Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 03:30:04PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > What do we need this in a GR for?
>
> To reaffirm the principles you are working to erode.
Your principles are the support and spreading of non-free software?
Just what is wrong with e
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 12:53:44PM -0600, Bruce Sass wrote:
> If you really want to show that non-free and contrib are not part of the
> distribution you should move them out from under "dists".
> ftp...debian.org/
> debian/ # has infrastructure support
> dists/
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 acknowledging
> > that the c
I could rediscribe the method but I couldn't make changes as large as what
were suggested without going through the formal change process for the
constitution.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 07:27:43PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > I should point o
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I should point out that leaving this issue unresolved makes it possible for
> people to raise a legitimate challenge to our voting procedure, since the
> present description avails itself of multiple interpretations of the same
> set of ballots.
I a
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 02:58:35PM -0700, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to see what
> would be gained.
Elimination of ambuguity.
Recent events have persuaded me, however, that lots of people like their
ambiguity, even if it ultimately e
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 acknowledging
> that the current situation does indeed give somewhat too much credibility.
I'm afrai
I could rediscribe the method but I couldn't make changes as large as what
were suggested without going through the formal change process for the
constitution.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 07:27:43PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > I should point
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I should point out that leaving this issue unresolved makes it possible for
> people to raise a legitimate challenge to our voting procedure, since the
> present description avails itself of multiple interpretations of the same
> set of ballots.
I
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 02:58:35PM -0700, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to see what
> would be gained.
Elimination of ambuguity.
Recent events have persuaded me, however, that lots of people like their
ambiguity, even if it ultimately
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 acknowledging
> that the current situation does indeed give somewhat too much credibility.
I'm afra
In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to see what
would be gained.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 01:36:43AM +, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
>
[snipped an interesting and long discussion on voting methods]
>
> If members of debian want to perfect their voting system,
> then I sug
I second this amendment.
Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 11:03:33PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > DEBIAN GENERAL RESOLUTION
> > Proposed by: John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I wish to propose an ammendment to the proposed resolution as follows.
>
> The text of the resolution
In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to see what
would be gained.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 01:36:43AM +, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
>
[snipped an interesting and long discussion on voting methods]
>
> If members of debian want to perfect their voting system,
> then I su
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, C. Cooke wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > to dists/woody/
> > main
> > add-on/
<...>
>
> dists/woody/
> debian
> non-debian/
If you really want to show that non-free and contrib are not part of the
distribution you sh
I second this amendment.
Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 11:03:33PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > DEBIAN GENERAL RESOLUTION
> > Proposed by: John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I wish to propose an ammendment to the proposed resolution as follows.
>
> The text of the resolution
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, C. Cooke wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > to dists/woody/
> > main
> > add-on/
<...>
>
> dists/woody/
> debian
> non-debian/
If you really want to show that non-free and contrib are not part of the
distribution you s
On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> dists/ woody/
> main
> contrib
> non-free
>
> todists/woody/
> main
> add-on/
> contrib
> non-free
> ex
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Double standards are damned fun!
>
> "Does Debian include non-free software?"
> "Well that depends ... Debian doesn't officially provide non-free, no."
> "Unofficially?"
> "It's all there, waiting for you."
> "Cool."
Thats the difference between the D
On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> dists/ woody/
> main
> contrib
> non-free
>
> todists/woody/
> main
> add-on/
> contrib
> non-free
> e
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Double standards are damned fun!
>
> "Does Debian include non-free software?"
> "Well that depends ... Debian doesn't officially provide non-free, no."
> "Unofficially?"
> "It's all there, waiting for you."
> "Cool."
Thats the difference between the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 7 Jun 2000, John Goerzen wrote:
> Debian General Resolution
>
> Resolved:
>
> A. That the Debian Social Contract with the Free Software Community be
> amended as follows:
>
> 1. That text of Section 5 be modified to read: "We acknowledge that
> some of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 7 Jun 2000, John Goerzen wrote:
> Debian General Resolution
>
> Resolved:
>
> A. That the Debian Social Contract with the Free Software Community be
> amended as follows:
>
> 1. That text of Section 5 be modified to read: "We acknowledge that
> some o
23 matches
Mail list logo
