Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Because you've repeatedly said in this thread that one of your motives in
> discussing this is to ensure that the DFSG declares this a bug so that it
> will be fixed.
I would say not “… so that it will be fixed”, but rather “… so
that it's easier to reco
Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Indeed, and I've no wish to impede anyone in efforts to fix bugs.
>>> I'm arguing for interpretation of the social contract such that
>>> DFSG violations are bugs by defi
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Indeed, and I've no wish to impede anyone in efforts to fix bugs.
> > I'm arguing for interpretation of the social contract such that
> > DFSG violations are bugs by definition, so they can be fixed as
> > suc
On Sat, Nov 22 2008, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> Really? you didn't explain why; what I'm asking is what you did to fix
> the bugs you believe to violate your interpretation of DFSG. That's my
> point (dunno what you understood)
If you want to see what kind of work some DD is doing, can you
ta
On Sat, Nov 22 2008, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dimanche 23 novembre 2008 à 00:09 +1100, Ben Finney a écrit :
>> You seem to have missed what I said: In order to have *anyone* fix
>> them, they need to be acknowledged as DFSG violations.
>
> Would you please stop your lies and go trolling elsew
On Sat, Nov 22 2008, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> Really? so can you please show us what you've done to fix them?
>> Note that we can both have what we are asking for: discussing a
>> general resolution does not preclude working to improve Debian.
>
> Sure we can, then why don't do both instead of just
On Sat, Nov 22 2008, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 10:34, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Jacob Hallén <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> The first paragraph of the SC is a lie!
>>
>> I wasn't lying when I agreed to that.
>
> And what changed in the Debian Project if you ag
Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Indeed, and I've no wish to impede anyone in efforts to fix bugs. I'm
> arguing for interpretation of the social contract such that DFSG
> violations are bugs by definition, so they can be fixed as such.
The DFSG doesn't define bugs. It defines release-cr
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Le dimanche 23 novembre 2008 à 00:09 +1100, Ben Finney a écrit :
> > You seem to have missed what I said: In order to have *anyone* fix
> > them, they need to be acknowledged as DFSG violations.
>
> Would you please stop your lies
Personal attacks
Le dimanche 23 novembre 2008 à 00:09 +1100, Ben Finney a écrit :
> You seem to have missed what I said: In order to have *anyone* fix
> them, they need to be acknowledged as DFSG violations.
Would you please stop your lies and go trolling elsewhere? Please?
Happily the Debian kernel maintainers
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 14:09, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Sandro Tosi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 13:41, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > "Sandro Tosi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 10:34, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You seem to have missed what I said: In order to have *anyone* fix
> them, they need to be acknowledged as DFSG violations. That's what
> is being discussed: whether certain freedoms are or are not DFSG
> violations (and therefore bugs).
Poorly phrased. “…
"Sandro Tosi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 13:41, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Sandro Tosi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 10:34, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > Jacob Hallén <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> >> Debian is
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 13:41, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Sandro Tosi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 10:34, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Jacob Hallén <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> Debian is not 100% free software, and it never has been.
>> >
"Sandro Tosi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 10:34, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jacob Hallén <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Debian is not 100% free software, and it never has been.
> >
> > Indeed. Those instances where it's not free are bugs to be fixed.
>
>
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 10:34, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jacob Hallén <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The first paragraph of the SC is a lie!
>
> I wasn't lying when I agreed to that.
And what changed in the Debian Project if you agree to it or not?
>> Debian is not 100% free softw
Jacob Hallén <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The first paragraph of the SC is a lie!
I wasn't lying when I agreed to that. It's a promise, a measure to
stive for. I will concede that we're currently not meeting that
promise, but that doesn't make it a lie.
> Debian is not 100% free software, and i
17 matches
Mail list logo
