Re: CoC policy for package contents

Ilu writes: > I'm not sure whether developing a Code of Acceptable Content policy at > this point in time is a good idea though. I'll go much further than that, and say that I believe it's an exceptionally bad idea. As Debian Developers, we commit to adherence to a set of core common values, w

Re: Question to all candidates: How do you feel about OSI, FSF and LF? (and Debian while we're at it (and AI if you want to))

Gianfranco Costamagna writes: > yes. There are use case (e.g. automotive, safety), where you *have* to lock > the system, for good reasons. Please do not confuse the corporate desire to limit liability with actual improvements in safety. Bdale signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Summary of the current state of the tag2upload discussion

Russ Allbery writes: > Also, source package builds generally aren't done inside sbuild if I > remember the architecture correctly. I believe you are correct. In my own config, which uses cowbuilder to provide the clean chroot build environment, the process I use creates a source package in the

Re: Call for seconds: Delegate to the DPL

Gunnar Wolf writes: > But I believe our project is _first and foremost_ a political > statement (that produces a first-grade technological artifact). I understand your position, but I see this exactly in the opposite way. Bdale signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian Project Leader election 2023: First call for votes

Luna Jernberg writes: > Alright i did not know that, thanks for the info Also, while I guess you could think of it as just a "congratulations" to vote when there's a single candidate, I think of it more as a "vote of confidence". By voting, and putting the candidate above none of the above, I'm

Re: Possible draft non-free firmware option with SC change

"Jonathan Carter (highvoltage)" writes: > I do think some parts are important to include though, how about: I disagree strongly on this. We should work REALLY hard to have the SC capture the commitments we're making to our users, and then stop. Specifically, we should avoid including text that

Re: Ballot option 2 - Merely hide Identities of Developers Casting a Particular Vote and allow verification

Sam Hartman writes: > Even if you don't want to move toward some different voting system, do > we really want to require a constitutional amendment if say the > secretary wanted to move voting to a salsa-authenticated website to make > it easier and more accessible to our members? Yes. While I'

Re: Informal Discussion: Identities of Voters Casting a Particular Ballot are No Longer Public

Russ Allbery writes: > This is a vote, though, just a kind of awkward one. If we're going to > hold a vote, I think we should do it with decent software designed to > handle a vote, rather than asking some poor person to manually verify and > count mailing list messages. I agree. I'd personall

Re: Renaming the FTP Masters

Felix Lechner writes: > Hi, > > On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 5:12 AM Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: >> >> Those proposing >> improvements must also demonstrate how the claimed improvements >> provide greater benefit than the cost incurred in implementing the >> improvements. > > I had hoped to sidestep th

Re: Towards more GRs

Simon Richter writes: > ... if I look back, the most controversial > votes were those where there were only two options and where people had > to pick a side. I suspect this has more to do with the underlying nature of the issue being voted on than how the ballot was crafted. A divisive issue

Re: Do we want to Handle Secret Ballots in the same GR as Voting Changes

Louis-Philippe Véronneau writes: > I'd tend to be in favor of making this a separate GR. I agree. Bdale signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Do we want to Handle Secret Ballots in the same GR as Voting Changes

Pierre-Elliott Bécue writes: > Then, we realized that we could probably add Secret voting (if it felt > right to everyone) as the discussion on Russ' proposal didn't go in a > too consuming spiral. Perahaps this exposes a distinction between those of you who have spent a lot of time thinking abo

Re: Draft proposal for resolution process changes

Russ Allbery writes: > The process I'm proposing arguably favors the opposite side from my own in > the TC decision that primarily prompted this change and would have > prevented the process that indeed happened. ... > But with the benefit of a few > years of hindsight and watching subsequent

Re: General Resolution: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board result

Sam Hartman writes: > The math certainly helps. We can easily see that even if we think that > kind of strategic exploration is not an abuse, it clearly would be an > abuse if some privileged category of people got to choose the ballot > options. The sensitivity of preference-based voting syste

Re: General Resolution: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board result

Timo Röhling writes: > * Roberto C. Sánchez [2021-04-18 16:10]: >>3:1 majority > That would put a public statement on par with a change in the > Constitution, which is a political statement in itself. I admit to having really mixed feelings about whether Debian should *ever* make broad public s

Re: Re: General Resolution: Statement regarding Richard Stallman's readmission to the FSF board result

FWIW, I didn't consider 7 and 8 at all similar. After watching the strain the pre-vote discussion introduced, I decided making no statement as a project was the best outcome. But if the project were to make a statement, I wanted to express preference between the acceptable to me statements,

Re: [draft] Cancel this year's in-person Debian Developers Conference DebConf20

Scott Kitterman writes: > What I would have hoped is that project members would trust the people that > they have (indirectly) delegated the responsibility to run Debconf to to do a > good job and only once there is something that's enough of a problem to > require a project wide decision to c

Re: [draft] Cancel this year's in-person Debian Developers Conference DebConf20

Scott Kitterman writes: > It's almost like this discussion about a GR was a premature waste of > everyone's time. It's also possible that discussion about a possible GR influenced the ultimate decision in a useful way. [shrug] Bdale signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [draft] Cancel this year's in-person Debian Developers Conference DebConf20

They have until the GR is ready for a vote to do the right thing. Bdale On May 22, 2020 7:23:08 AM MDT, Antonio Terceiro wrote: >On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 02:40:55PM +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: >> This is a draft for a GR I would like to propose. >> >> Cancel this year's in-person Debian Dev

Re: Withdrawing Proposal C; Option Ordering; CFV Timing

Kurt Roeckx writes: > I'm thinking about renaming F to just "Focus on systemd", to make > it shorter. I'm not sure how devotee is going to like wrapping > long lines. Not sure I "get a vote" on this, but that would work fine for me. The text should adequately elucidate the objectives, so trying

Re: Proposal: Reaffirm our commitment to support portability and multiple implementations

Guillem Jover writes: > I think the current GR is incorrectly framing the problem at hand, > as if it was just an init system selection. This resonates with me, but... > I'm thus proposing the following: I find this really appealing as a higher-level statement of values and intent, but unfortu

Re: Debian Project Leader Elections 2019: Call for nominations

Sam Hartman writes: > How much of the DPL's financial role can be delegated? Unclear. > Would the governing procedures/bilaws/whatever of our trusted > organizations permit a DPL to delegate some or all of this? I think so. However, I suspect this would not feel like a significant reduction i

Re: Debian Project Leader Elections 2019: Call for nominations

Lucas Nussbaum writes: > - it's a position where you are often alone, and lack feedback This is true in the limit, but I, and a number of other former DPLs, have often made ourselves available to the acting DPL to act as a "sounding board". In fact, I think I've personally provided advice and g

Re: Debian Project Leader Elections 2019: Call for nominations

Chris, thank you for your service! Two terms as DPL is a serious contribution and commitment to Debian, and I greatly appreciate it! Bdale On March 12, 2019 3:26:26 AM MDT, Chris Lamb wrote: >Dear Developers, > >> Since there were no candidates during the nomination period, the >> nomination p

Re: Question: What would you like to see {more,less} of?

Chris Lamb writes: > Every time I tried drafting such "loaded" opinions in the past I could > already hear the (perhaps justified…) pushback and thus decided not to > get closer involved. I think it depends a lot on how local vs general the topic is. For example, in my second (successful) run a

Re: Question: What would you like to see {more,less} of?

Lars Wirzenius writes: > I'd like to see more overt, public intervention when conflicts, "flame > wars", happen, and even before things flare up. This has been a persistent meme for a long time (I'm pretty sure it's one of the big reasons I failed to be re-elected DPL 15 or so years ago), and fo

Re: Proposed GR: State exception for security bugs in Social Contract clause 3

Scott Kitterman writes: > I don't think we should be monkeying with the Social Contract to solve a non- > problem. I agree. Bdale signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: GR Proposal: replace "Chairman" with "Chair" throughout the Debian Constitution

Margarita Manterola writes: > I'm therefore proposing the following General Resolution: Seconded. Bdale signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: GR Proposal: replace "Chairman" with "Chair" throughout the Debian Constitution

martin f krafft writes: > In addition to the proposed change, the project shall vote to > empower the DPL together with the Project Secretary to make minor > editorial changes in our foundation documents without requiring > the process of a GR. > > To protect our foundations, such a change must b

Re: GR: Constitutional Amendment to fix an off-by-one error and duplicate section numbering

Andreas Barth writes: >Constitutional Amendment: TC Supermajority Fix Seconded. Bdale signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: More women in key positions ?

Mehdi DOGGUY writes: > Le 31 mars 2015 02:49, bjf...@gmail.com a écrit : >> >> After explaining we have an impressive ratio of female to male >> participants in the Debian project as a whole (not just technical), >> your suggestion is to get more women involved generally with Debian >> (still not

Re: Re: [DRAFT #2] Maximum term for tech ctte members

An easy way to resolve the question about the "mandatory vacation period" would be to just have both variants available when this goes to GR? In other words, let the project decide whether that seems prudent. For the record, as the now-longest-serving member of the TC, I'll be the first person to

Re: "done with consensus decisionmaking", "war", "rearguard battles" [was: Re: REISSUED CfV: General Resolution: Init system coupling]

long. I choose to reply only to the portion in which you replied to me. > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 12:21:50AM -0800, Bdale Garbee wrote: >> Bas Wijnen writes: >> >> > The only problematic part I see is that he gets carried away at times. >> > That's a ver

Re: "done with consensus decisionmaking", "war", "rearguard battles" [was: Re: REISSUED CfV: General Resolution: Init system coupling]

Bas Wijnen writes: > The only problematic part I see is that he gets carried away at times. > That's a very minor issue, and I forgive him, as long as he isn't > insulting people. He has certainly insulted me. https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/06/msg00040.html If you don't know me ve

Re: Maximum term for tech ctte members

Anthony Towns writes: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 08:34:28AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: >> I think rotation is a good idea. My main minor concern is that it >> doesn't allow reappointing members to the CTTE if there are no >> nominees whom the DPL and CTTE finds acceptable (or even if there are no

Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

Russ Allbery writes: > We all want there to be multiple implementations of standard, reasonable > APIs so that we can choose software based on its merits and not because > it's the only implementation of a useful interface. We also all live in > the real world where that doesn't always happen.

Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

Colin Watson writes: > On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 12:49:22PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 12:35:15PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: >> > As a consequence, the GR replaces the outcome of the TC vote. The GR >> > text explicitly adopts the existing TC decision on the default,

Re: [Proposal] GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian

Thomas Goirand writes: > Hoping that this will help others to understand better what's going on > and know what we are at today. Thank you for the update, Thomas. Bdale pgpGP9stzQaFl.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: Results of the Lenny release GR

r...@aybabtu.com (Robert Millan) writes: > So, what I think would be the honest approach to this problem, is for you to > either announce that your interpretation is the way it is because the ballot > was flawed ... In my preamble to the second call for votes, http://lists.debian.org/debian-v

Re: Purpose of the Constitution and the Foundation Documents

i...@davenant.greenend.org.uk (Ian Jackson) writes: > In fact I'm strongly opposed to all > of these binary firmware blobs and like nonsense. It's just that I > recognise that the way I would have to fight that battle is by helping > to do the work to get them out of Linux rather than postponing

Re: Results of the Lenny release GR

On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 08:22 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 05:48:33PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: > > On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 01:04 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > > What you describe sounds like option 3, or maybe option 4. What is your > > > opinio

Re: Results of the Lenny release GR

On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 01:04 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 09:45:48AM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: > > However, analysis of the voting results in this and prior GRs relating > > to similar issues in prior releases indicates to me that Debian > > develo

Re: Results of the Lenny release GR

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 16:13 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > However, your announcement seems to assume these only concerned kernel > packages. This leaves the message open to interpretation, it could mean > any of the following: > > - You assume the release team no longer intends to ignore DFSG

Results of the Lenny release GR

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I've been reminded that as Acting Secretary I should officially announce the results of the recent vote. My apologies for the delay! Details of the outcome and how various options were voted are available at http://www.debian.org/vote/2008/

Re: Re: Second call for votes for the Lenny release GR

Some of the links have changed because of our change to using user 'secretary' for the vote processing. You can see the list of currently tallied votes, for example, at: http://master.debian.org/~secretary/gr_lenny/voters.txt Bdale -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists

Re: Second call for votes for the Lenny release GR

On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 00:56 +0100, Frans Pop wrote: Hi Frans! > That is not the only problem. I agree, but I didn't think a CFV preamble was the right place to try and discuss this in detail. Happy to have further discussion about it in debian-vote. > > However, after thinking long and hard a

Re: Status of Lenny Release GR

On Sat, 2008-12-20 at 09:02 -0600, Kevin Glynn wrote: > What is the current status of the Lenny Release GR? The vote is in process. > Since then I have seen a proposal from Manoj to extend it a week and > calls for it to be suspended, but I don't see a message confirming > that. On the original

Re: Re: I hereby resign as secretary

> Now if only we could say positive things about people BEFORE they > resign, wouldn't this be a better place? +1E6 John, thank you for taking the time to write and post that note. I couldn't agree more. When Manoj and I joined the Debian project, there were only a couple dozen of us, and we

Re: I hereby resign as secretary

Manoj, As one of the few people around who has been part of the Debian project as long as you have, please accept my sincere appreciation for your long history of meaningful contributions... and in particular your lengthy and honorable service as our secretary! You have earned and retain my imm

Re: Technical committee resolution

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Jackson) writes: > Obviously that means those people have rather less time on their > hands. I think this is the main cause of the TC's current > largely-wedged state I don't personally think that the TC suffers primarily from members having limited time to devote. I thi

Re: Technical committee resolution

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Jacobowitz) writes: > I also think it's an excellent idea. It gives a rotating source of > follow-through, instead of relying on one or two members of the > group who feel differently about the group's obligations to end up > doing the follow-through (or dropping it and

Re: Counter-proposal: reaffirm support for the elected DPL

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loïc Minier) writes: > The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL. > > The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named "Dunc-Tank", lead > by > Anthony Towns, the current DPL, and Steve Mc Intyre, the Second in

Re: Questions to candidate Anthony Towns

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joey Hess) writes: > Anthony Towns wrote: >> (a) branching the archive or doing other necessary changes to ensure >> netinst CDs etc work reliably > > Netinsts are relatively robust (though can be broken), businesscard, > netboot, and floppy would really benefit from tha

another question to all candidates about stable point releases

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt) writes: > What would you do to make regular point releases possible? An even more interesting question for all of the candidates is "what do you think should be included in point releases"? Point releases are currently primarily a folding-in of securi

Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases

On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 15:26 +, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Moritz Muehlenhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-07 16:10]: > > Anthony Towns wrote: > > > There are, for instance, a range of outstanding RC bugs > > > on sudo as a result of the security release for it that need fixing, > > > which aiu

Re: Questions for the DPL candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthew Garrett) writes: > How about the creation of a checklist for meeting organisation and > reporting? Something along the lines of: > > 1) Has the meeting been announced well in advance? > 2) Have we defined the scope of the meeting? > 3) Have we given others an opportunity

Re: Question to all candidates.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Blu Corater) writes: > On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 11:53:51PM +0100, Romain Francoise wrote: >> Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > How do you see the relation between Debian and Ubuntu in the future? >> >> Note that the LWN article about the DPL election has some q

Re: dak and the debian infrastructure

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sven Luther) writes: > I know nobody excpt manty which is able to reproduce the builds of the > weekly/daily debian-cd thingies, and the debian-cd used to build them is > highly dependent on the archive organisation of the box on which it runs. For what it's worth, at least joe

Re: Questions to the scud team

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas Barth) writes: > do you consider the way the scud team way formed the preferred way in > future? What do you think are the special strength of that way? Is this > way transparent enough? I'm not quite sure what you mean? In my experience, "teams" often form when peopl

Re: Proposal: Keep non-free

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 aj@azure.humbug.org.au (Anthony Towns) writes: > I propose that the Debian project resolve that: > > == > Acknowledging that some of our users continue to require the use of > program

Re: Proposal: Keep non-free

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Towns) writes: > I propose that the Debian project resolve that: > > == > Acknowledging that some of our users continue to require the use of > programs tha

Re: Independent Count

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Moshe Zadka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Dear Debian Project Leader, > > As one of the candidates in the DPL elections, I feel that some remarks > made by the secretary in #debian-devel have caused me to be unable to > trust his integrity. I do not f

Re: Independent Count

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Moshe Zadka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Dear Debian Project Leader, > > As one of the candidates in the DPL elections, I feel that some remarks > made by the secretary in #debian-devel have caused me to be unable to > trust his integrity. I do not f

Re: Questions for the candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Banck) writes: > - Debian did have stronger ties to the FSF in the past. Maybe it is >time to think about our relationsship with the FSF and try to >cooperate/communicate more with the FSF in places where it might be >appropriate, like licensing issues, docu

Re: Questions for the candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Banck) writes: > - Debian did have stronger ties to the FSF in the past. Maybe it is >time to think about our relationsship with the FSF and try to >cooperate/communicate more with the FSF in places where it might be >appropriate, like licensing issues, docu

DPL platform

This is a copy of my platform, also available on the web at http://www.debian.org/vote/2003/vote_0001 Bdale Platform for Bdale Garbee Introduction / Biography My name is Bdale Garbee, and I ask you to re-elect me as your Debian Project Leader. For

DPL platform

This is a copy of my platform, also available on the web at http://www.debian.org/vote/2003/vote_0001 Bdale Platform for Bdale Garbee Introduction / Biography My name is Bdale Garbee, and I ask you to re-elect me as your Debian Project Leader. For

Re: Questions to all candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Osamu Aoki) writes: > What shall be done if there is a conflict between "user" and "freedom". > [X] Seek amicable compromise Until/unless our Social Contract changes, that's what we've promised to do! I passionately support freedom. I care about our users. For what it's wo

Re: Questions to all candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Osamu Aoki) writes: > What shall be done if there is a conflict between "user" and "freedom". > [X] Seek amicable compromise Until/unless our Social Contract changes, that's what we've promised to do! I passionately support freedom. I care about our users. For what it's wo

Re: our users as one of our priorities

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Oohara Yuuma) writes: > can you tell me what "Our Users" in #4 of the social contract means? When the Social Contract was originally drafted, the title "Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software" was meant to strike a balance between meeting the needs of those who would u

Re: A question for all candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rune B. Broberg) writes: > Only one person can 'win' this election, meaning we'll have 3 candidates > remaining after this election. How will not getting elected affect your > work within Debian, and the goals you stated in your platforms? I will continue to work for Debian reg

Re: Questions for all candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raphael Hertzog) writes: > 1. master.debian.org is still running potato. What do you think about >that ? As long as we continue to support security updates for potato, I'm not concerned about it. > 2. If you're regularly in contact with debian-admin or ftpmasters or > som

Re: Questions for Bdale

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raphael Hertzog) writes: > First of all, you give 2 or 3 "areas of focus", but what is that > exactly ? ... > A set of tasks that you'd like to highlight in the hope that more > people will work on them ? That's pretty close. One of the roles of a leader is to help id

Re: our users as one of our priorities

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Oohara Yuuma) writes: > can you tell me what "Our Users" in #4 of the social contract means? When the Social Contract was originally drafted, the title "Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software" was meant to strike a balance between meeting the needs of those who would u

Re: A question for all candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rune B. Broberg) writes: > Only one person can 'win' this election, meaning we'll have 3 candidates > remaining after this election. How will not getting elected affect your > work within Debian, and the goals you stated in your platforms? I will continue to work for Debian reg

Re: Questions for all candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raphael Hertzog) writes: > 1. master.debian.org is still running potato. What do you think about >that ? As long as we continue to support security updates for potato, I'm not concerned about it. > 2. If you're regularly in contact with debian-admin or ftpmasters or > som

Re: Questions for Bdale

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raphael Hertzog) writes: > First of all, you give 2 or 3 "areas of focus", but what is that > exactly ? ... > A set of tasks that you'd like to highlight in the hope that more > people will work on them ? That's pretty close. One of the roles of a leader is to help id

Re: DPL live debate (candidates, read this)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Michlmayr) writes: > * Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-02-26 11:43]: >> Saturday night would be best i think, UTC makes it hard for most >> people in europe (that would be 0100 on sunday morning, ending at 0200 >> or so). > > I'd prefer 2200 UTC as well, but I

Re: DPL live debate (candidates, read this)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Michlmayr) writes: > * Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-02-26 11:43]: >> Saturday night would be best i think, UTC makes it hard for most >> people in europe (that would be 0100 on sunday morning, ending at 0200 >> or so). > > I'd prefer 2200 UTC as well, but I

DPL Nomination

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 With this message, I announce my intention to seek re-election as Debian Project Leader. Bdale -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 iD8DBQE+PAurZKfA

DPL Nomination

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 With this message, I announce my intention to seek re-election as Debian Project Leader. Bdale -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 iD8DBQE+PAurZKfA

Re: Call for votes for the debian project leader election 2002

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Norbert Veber) writes: > > One side affect of this is that if you only put a number next to one > > person's name, and leave the rest blank, your vote pretty much means > > nothing. > > Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy of a > vote, and fill in ju

Re: Call for votes for the debian project leader election 2002

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Norbert Veber) writes: > > One side affect of this is that if you only put a number next to one > > person's name, and leave the rest blank, your vote pretty much means > > nothing. > > Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy of a > vote, and fill in j

Re: Some questions for the candidates...

aj@azure.humbug.org.au (Anthony Towns) writes: > On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 03:57:15AM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: > > > As DPL, how will you ensure the technical goals in your platform are > > > achieved? > > Leverage. > > (Surely I'm not the only one that

Re: Some questions for the candidates...

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Towns) writes: > On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 03:57:15AM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: > > > As DPL, how will you ensure the technical goals in your platform are > > > achieved? > > Leverage. > > (Surely I'm not the only one that

subscribe

subscribe

-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: question for all: Content of packages

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Dier) writes: > Since at least one person has off-handedly suggested that an elected > official, such as the DPL, should handle package content disputes, I > bring this question. > > Do you feel the DPL should be involved in these sorts of things? No. > And, optionally,

Re: question for all: Content of packages

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Dier) writes: > Since at least one person has off-handedly suggested that an elected > official, such as the DPL, should handle package content disputes, I > bring this question. > > Do you feel the DPL should be involved in these sorts of things? No. > And, optionally

Re: Q for candidates: the ALS issue

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Lawrence) writes: > 1. What actions (if any) would you take at DPL to ensure that similar >problems do not recur in the future? It would have been best if those actually involved in the arrangements for Debian at ALS last fall had followed up with Usenix immediately a

Re: Q for candidates: the ALS issue

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Lawrence) writes: > 1. What actions (if any) would you take at DPL to ensure that similar >problems do not recur in the future? It would have been best if those actually involved in the arrangements for Debian at ALS last fall had followed up with Usenix immediately

Re: questions: programming and leadership experience

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David N. Welton) writes: > 1) How long have you been in the software industry? One way or another, since about 1979. I've done enough different kinds of work that it's hard to summarize quickly. Everything from being a system admin, to building embedded systems hardware and s

Re: questions: programming and leadership experience

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David N. Welton) writes: > 1) How long have you been in the software industry? One way or another, since about 1979. I've done enough different kinds of work that it's hard to summarize quickly. Everything from being a system admin, to building embedded systems hardware and

Re: Debate announcement and call for votes

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Collins) writes: > We have tentatively scheduled an IRC Debate for the DPL candidates > around March 23rd 04:00 UTC. The times for the US work out to: > > (Friday 22nd March) > US/Pacific 8pm > US/Mountain 9pm > US/Central 10pm > US/Eastern

Re: Debate announcement and call for votes

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Collins) writes: > We have tentatively scheduled an IRC Debate for the DPL candidates > around March 23rd 04:00 UTC. The times for the US work out to: > > (Friday 22nd March) > US/Pacific 8pm > US/Mountain 9pm > US/Central 10pm > US/Eastern

Re: Some questions for the candidates...

aj@azure.humbug.org.au (Anthony Towns) writes: > So. The first question is is this dissatisfaction justified? How long is > the woody release taking compared to other releases? That's an interesting way to look at it, but frankly I'm more interested in how our users feel about it ... and it seems

Re: Some questions for the candidates...

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Towns) writes: > So. The first question is is this dissatisfaction justified? How long is > the woody release taking compared to other releases? That's an interesting way to look at it, but frankly I'm more interested in how our users feel about it ... and it seems cle

Re: Question regarding Raphael's platform

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thom May) writes: > That was what I intended the question to be. Much better. Thanks! Bdale

Re: Questions for the candidates

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcelo E. Magallon) writes: > With that as an starting point, do you have any opinions regarding > this topic? Do you regard Debian as an "open enough" organization, > or do you think there's room for improvement? There is always room for improvement. I think w

Re: Question regarding Raphael's platform

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thom May) writes: > 1) What resources do you feel that debian could provide to its developers to > allow them to work more productively on their packages and other debian > specific work? Ben Collins makes a good point about the value of trying to make it easier for each devel

  1   2   >