Hi Solveig,
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 02:31:54AM +, Solveig wrote:
> [short version: The Code of Conduct should be vastly rewritten. Yes,
> *before* voting on it]
> A few days ago, i saw the proposal for a Code of Conduct. First I was
> very glad, then I read it and was perplexed. I made some r
Hi!
[short version: The Code of Conduct should be vastly rewritten. Yes,
*before* voting on it]
A few days ago, i saw the proposal for a Code of Conduct. First I was
very glad, then I read it and was perplexed. I made some research, which
confirmed my suspicion: the Code of Conduct that is actual
Hi Paul,
On 22/03/14 at 17:43 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> To the candidates,
>
> Which packages from Debian contrib/non-free do you use or have installed?
Without trying to get a cleaner sheet first, vrms says:
Firmwares, documentation (make-doc, manpages-posix{,-dev}), rar (I had
to open a RAR 3.
On 22/03/14 at 15:42 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> To the candidates,
>
> Some parts of the DFSG seem like they do not apply to some types of
> works. In particular, items 2, 6, 7 and 8 seem to not apply to things
> that are not "programs". Much of the DFSG doesn't seem to apply to
> things that are n
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Georges Khaznadar
* Package name: geophar
Version : 13.04.5
Upstream Author : Nicolas Pourcelot
* URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/geophar/
* License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Swiss arm
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 08:40:52AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> My point is that that GR was highly divisive, and had far-reaching
> repercussions beyond what the original proposers had expected. We have a
> consensus now that everything in Debian should be free, even those parts
> that some don
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 02:45:10AM -0500, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> What if the DPL begins to consider persistent disagreement with the
> DPL as a form of "flaming"?
We can then override the DPL's decision, or recall the DPL.
Also, there is a second option on the ballot. You don't have to agree wit
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> We have a consensus now that everything in Debian should be free,
> even those parts that some don't consider to be "software".
I agree with the rest of your post but I don't think we actually have
consensus here.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wi
What if the DPL begins to consider persistent disagreement with the
DPL as a form of "flaming"?
- "Wouter Verhelst" wrote:
> I'd like to propose a rationale for option one on the ballot, if I
> may:
>
> Rationale:
> Allowing the DPL to update the Code of Conduct will make it easier
> to
>
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 03:25:46PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > You mean you want to go through GR 2004_003 *again*?
>
> That GR passed and was about the SC, not the DFSG. Personally I think
> it was a mistake to not change the terminolog
Hi list,
I'm sorry to be doing this in the middle of campaigning, but this will
come to a vote pretty soon, and I don't think I want to wait until it's
too late. Candidates can ignore this (unless they want to comment, of
course).
I'd like to propose a rationale for option one on the ballot, if I
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> You mean you want to go through GR 2004_003 *again*?
That GR passed and was about the SC, not the DFSG. Personally I think
it was a mistake to not change the terminology used in the DFSG at the
same time as changing the terminology in the
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 03:42:43PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> I believe the DFSG should ensure equality of access to works in
> Debian. Thus it is my opinion that all items in the DFSG should apply
> to the contents of all source and binary packages in Debian main and
> that we should amend the DFSG
13 matches
Mail list logo
