On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 08:15:21PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Does Author A's mail get outed anyway as part of author B's
> response? In other wrods, shall the declassification committee
> redact quotes in mails the primary author has said is OK to the
> publish, but in the scenar
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:38:54 +1000, Anthony Towns
said:
> So, the way I would think it'd work is:
> 1) team selects one or two months worth of -private posts to
> declassify
> 2) team goes through the posts, marking any that shouldn't be
> released
> 3) team
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 18:00:27 +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> The proposal guarantees that if an author wishes his/her post(s) to
>> remain confidential, they will do so. The proposal has a specific
>> procedure that must be followed to publish any -p
Margarita Manterola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> There is important historical information hidden in the debian-private
> archives. Like the reasons why the social contract and the DFSG are
> the way they are.
I believe that is a small proportion of the messages and does not
justify the proposed disclos
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Let's compare that with some license: GPL expects a binary software
> releaser to keep the source available for three years. This is generaly
> accepted as a period which is long enough to make the source not
> interesting for anyone. Should we force that
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 04:06:22PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Margarita Manterola wrote:
> > Also, people in the NM queue that have to agree to the Social Contract
> > and the DFSG, might be interested in knowing why these documents have
> > the shape they have before actually agreeing to them.
Hello,
This message is intended for our customers who subscribed for monthly
news letters.
This month we present our new web site containing rape video and pics
galleries depicting brutal incest. Get a chance to watch:
a father fucking his daughter
a brother fucking his sister
All the above m
Margarita Manterola wrote:
> Also, people in the NM queue that have to agree to the Social Contract
> and the DFSG, might be interested in knowing why these documents have
> the shape they have before actually agreeing to them.
Once they leave NM-mode and enter DD-mode they can read the archive
di
On 11/21/05, Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do not see any reason for this GR since I cannot remember any serious
> request to make -private mails public where this action would really
> have been beneficial for the outside world.
The reasons were stated in one of the first emails of
On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 11:41:34AM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> --
>
> Thus, I propose that the Debian project resolve that the process
> defined in GR Proposal 2 will be applied *only* for the future content
> of debian-private mailing list.
>
> --
>
> To me, it's a second option that would mak
#include
* Thomas Bushnell BSG [Mon, Nov 21 2005, 10:25:26PM]:
> > I'm amazed anyone considers otherwise. It's unethical to publish
> > things that debian promised to keep private. I think it also leaves
> > us wide open to accusations of infringing copyright.
>
> I think you are wrong on both c
11 matches
Mail list logo
