On Jo, 01 apr 21, 17:00:47, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>
> This would be a vote I would also like to see as secret. The
> constitution says:
> 3. Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes, tallies, and
>results are not revealed during the voting period; after the vote
>the Projec
On Jo, 01 apr 21, 00:12:56, Jessica Clarke wrote:
> On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal wrote:
>
> > (If this message breaks the mailing list protocol in any way, I am
> > deeply sorry, I am new to these debian mailing lists)
>
> Top-posting is awful and should be an instant rejection of a
On Ma, 23 mar 21, 16:40:32, Gard Spreemann wrote:
>
> That's a good point, I agree. What about packages that we have lost
> interest in, but that our users very much have not? Admittedly, I have
> no idea of what the cardinality of that intersection is.
[just a user here]
If such packages and us
On Jo, 20 nov 14, 13:23:04, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > [private reply on purpose, since I'm not a DD]
>
> [Neither am I; replying publically since your reply was actually public.]
Oh, always had the impression you are a DD :)
> -8<-
>
On Jo, 20 nov 14, 21:43:03, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> [private reply on purpose, since I'm not a DD]
Which I did not, sorry...
Kind regards,
Andrei
--
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/
[private reply on purpose, since I'm not a DD]
On Jo, 20 nov 14, 11:25:10, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> """
> No Developer may serve on the Technical Committee for more than 4 years
> out of any 6 year period. A Developer's term on the Technical Committee
> expires if they would exceed this limit.
>
On Ma, 28 ian 14, 07:41:26, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 08:39:52PM +0100, Guillem Jover a écrit :
> >
> > This is the revised draft GR proposal (please see below); I'm looking
> > for sponsors now.
>
> Hi Guillem,
>
> if the result of the current TC vote is « further discussi
On Mi, 20 mar 13, 06:47:32, Bart Martens wrote:
>
> Good question. See also for example bug 681659. I don't know why
> pidgin-facebookchat would belong in section main while flashplugin-nonfree
> would belong section contrib. Both packages contain software that can freely
> be redistributed but
On Ma, 05 oct 10, 15:47:05, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Bernhard R. Link [101005 11:55]:
> > My best guess yet is that this proposal is to tell DAM that we do not oppose
> > second-class Debian Developers with less privileges, so that they may add
> > second-class DDs in the hope that this will en
9 matches
Mail list logo
