Mr. Secretary,
I have a series of questions concerning recent proposals for the Debian
Project. I am a long-time user of Debian, but not a developer. While
I understand and accept that I have no official standing in Debian's
decision making system and have no vote, I feel that my long-term us
Le Tue, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:41:27AM -0500, Chris Lawrence écrivait:
> FWIW they seem to have done a good job of packaging and maintaining
> the Gnome stuff. It'd be nice to see someone from Helix officially
> maintaining our Gnome packages (or have them liaise with the current
> Debian maintainer(s
Mr. Secretary,
I have a series of questions concerning recent proposals for the Debian
Project. I am a long-time user of Debian, but not a developer. While
I understand and accept that I have no official standing in Debian's
decision making system and have no vote, I feel that my long-term u
Le Tue, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:41:27AM -0500, Chris Lawrence écrivait:
> FWIW they seem to have done a good job of packaging and maintaining
> the Gnome stuff. It'd be nice to see someone from Helix officially
> maintaining our Gnome packages (or have them liaise with the current
> Debian maintainer(
On 13-Jun-00, 01:30 (CDT), John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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 princ
[The first time I replied to this message, I forgot to send a
copy to the list]
In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to >see
what
would be gained.
That question is answered at:
http://www.debian.org/~stevegr/voting/
There, I talk about a number of criteria for co
On 13-Jun-00, 01:30 (CDT), John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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 prin
[The first time I replied to this message, I forgot to send a
copy to the list]
>In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to >see
>what
>would be gained.
That question is answered at:
http://www.debian.org/~stevegr/voting/
There, I talk about a number of criteria for c
> FWIW they seem to have done a good job of packaging and maintaining
> the Gnome stuff. It'd be nice to see someone from Helix officially
> maintaining our Gnome packages (or have them liaise with the current
> Debian maintainer(s) of those packages).
>
> I agree that I'm not really sure what v
On Jun 13, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> AFAIK the helix people are free to upload their debs if they want to
> maintain them according to our policies..
FWIW they seem to have done a good job of packaging and maintaining
the Gnome stuff. It'd be nice to see someone from Helix officially
maintaining o
> FWIW they seem to have done a good job of packaging and maintaining
> the Gnome stuff. It'd be nice to see someone from Helix officially
> maintaining our Gnome packages (or have them liaise with the current
> Debian maintainer(s) of those packages).
>
> I agree that I'm not really sure what
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Paul J Thompson wrote:
> archives. For instance, I mean, the Helix Gnome collection of debs is
> far better then our group and I think it would be nice to show our
> support to them. So, what about providing a place within the debian
> distribution unofficial area to include
On Jun 13, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> AFAIK the helix people are free to upload their debs if they want to
> maintain them according to our policies..
FWIW they seem to have done a good job of packaging and maintaining
the Gnome stuff. It'd be nice to see someone from Helix officially
maintaining
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Paul J Thompson wrote:
> archives. For instance, I mean, the Helix Gnome collection of debs is
> far better then our group and I think it would be nice to show our
> support to them. So, what about providing a place within the debian
> distribution unofficial area to include
> > On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 11:03:33PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > 4) noting that the Debian project already distributes various other
> > collections of unofficial packages, the project endorses a move to
> > specifically collect the various other add-on components such as
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 11:03:33PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > 4) noting that the Debian project already distributes various other
> > collections of unofficial packages, the project endorses a move to
> > specifically collect the various other add-on components such as
> >
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> 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/ #
** On Jun 13, John Goerzen scribbled:
[snip]
> > facts I outlined are true, then the GR doesn't make sense at all! ANd that's
>
> Why? Why does it not make sense to remove the non-free software from
> the Debian Project?
Because many developers and users think and have written so that it would b
On Tue, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:30:30AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> 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
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> 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/ #
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marek Habersack) writes:
> > Do you wish Debian to be known for providing non-free software? The
> > social contract says that Debian is 100% free software, yet you quite
> > clearly point out above Debian has an obvious double standard. We say
> > Debian is 100% free softwar
** On Jun 13, John Goerzen scribbled:
[snip]
> > facts I outlined are true, then the GR doesn't make sense at all! ANd that's
>
> Why? Why does it not make sense to remove the non-free software from
> the Debian Project?
Because many developers and users think and have written so that it would
On Tue, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:30:30AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> 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
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 er
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 cu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marek Habersack) writes:
> > Do you wish Debian to be known for providing non-free software? The
> > social contract says that Debian is 100% free software, yet you quite
> > clearly point out above Debian has an obvious double standard. We say
> > Debian is 100% free softwa
27 matches
Mail list logo
