Le Tue, May 06, 2025 at 01:26:19AM +0200, Aigars Mahinovs a écrit :
> This one is much simpler. Maybe because the lawyers being used are not too
> good.
>
> https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67538258/tremblay-v-openai-inc/
>
> Authors claim a lot of stuff, basically a generic shotgun of copyri
Le Mon, May 05, 2025 at 11:44:30PM +0200, Aigars Mahinovs a écrit :
> On Sun, 4 May 2025 at 17:30, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > It is incorrect, because the New York Times did in fact file suit
> > against Microsoft, OpenAI, and other parties related to copyright
> > infringement of their large l
> > Wikipedia includes this citation:
> > "" However, many AI applications are not perceived as AI: "A lot of cutting
> > edge AI has filtered into general applications, often without being
> > called AI because once something becomes useful enough and common enough
> > it's not labeled AI anymore.
Le Mon, May 05, 2025 at 01:12:13PM -0600, Sam Hartman a écrit :
>
> I'm not sure if this is too late. The mail to debian-devel-announce was
> kind of late, and I hope there is still some discussion time left.
>
> It is late enough that I am immediately seeking seconds for the
> following proposal
Le Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 01:56:17PM -0400, M. Zhou a écrit :
> ===
> Proposal A: "AI models released under open source license without original
> training data or program" are not seen as DFSG-compliant.
> ==
Le Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 09:44:31AM +0800, Sean Whitton a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> On Tue 08 Apr 2025 at 01:09pm GMT, Holger Levsen wrote:
>
> > The Technical Committee may:
> >
> > Decide on any matter of technical policy.
> > Decide any technical matter where Developers' jurisdictions overla
Le Sun, Apr 06, 2025 at 11:08:35AM -0300, Paulo Henrique de Lima Santana a
écrit :
> Hi,
>
> This is not related to the election, but I would like to propose to the next
> DPL we organize a "call for donations".
>
> First, we need to organize a "call for people interesting to organize a call
> f
Le Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 12:41:22PM +0200, Daniel Gröber a écrit :
> Hi Ian, Hi all,
>
> We all know Debian is [dying], right?
Finally ? I read that every two years since I joined in 2001...
Meanwhile popularity-contest report 30% more bookworm users than users
of previous stable releases at thei
> You and your behaviours effects are worse than those from many of the
> people we had to expell in the past.
Joerg,
Since you are (also) DAM, this constitutes a direct threat which is a
violation of the CoC.
Cheers,
--
Bill.
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Le Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 04:04:08PM +0200, Faidon Liambotis a écrit :
> Branden,
>
> Your email is titled "Q for nominees", however in all of its 1,000 words
> I struggled to find a single question.
Just after bullet 5.
"I ask the nominees to publicly endorse the foregoing proposals, or
articula
Le Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 06:55:15PM +0100, Pierre-Elliott Bécue a écrit :
> "G. Branden Robinson" wrote on 20/03/2025 at
> 11:38:23+0100:
>
> > Dear nominees,
> >
> > Thank you for standing for the office of Debian Project Leader (DPL).
> >
> > Prompted in part by many years of reflection on the
Le Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 10:44:03AM +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> _for_ _no_ _good_ _reason_-for instance, cases where the maintainer is
> inactive, and nobody truly cares. Last year I used some UDD query[2]
>
> udd=> SELECT DISTINCT count(*) FROM sources WHERE release = 'sid' and vcs_url
> no
Le Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 11:44:21AM -0700, Soren Stoutner a écrit :
> - BACKGROUND STARTS -
>
> The text of the current mailing list code of conduct states:
Hi Soren,
In this text, at some point, you need to state under which article of the
Debian constitution this GR falls and why.
Afte
Le Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 11:41:08AM +0100, Ilu a écrit :
> There is also no way and no necessity to adapt the GA text based on
> unofficial rumors since ...
>
> > ... the answer from the EU legislative body will not be to read and
> > consider each bullet point we make --- ... the European legislat
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 04:36:29PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Bill Allombert dijo [Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:07:29PM +0100]:
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 09:25:17AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > > This is also something we discussed before sending this call for
> > >
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 09:25:17AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> This is also something we discussed before sending this call for
> votes. But how can we gauge whether the project is OK with issuing
> political statements or not? The only tool we were able to find is a
> GR.
The less we know about t
Le Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 04:14:51PM -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez a écrit :
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 10:06:42PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> > On 2023/11/26 21:24, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > We should not just put out a statement just because others have done so,
> >
On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 09:59:16AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> As I understand, the EU legislative process is quite advanced now, and
> I doubt we have the time to build "the perfect response". And the
> answer from the EU legislative body will not be to read and consider
> each bullet point we mak
Le Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 07:38:40PM +0200, Jonathan Carter a écrit :
> Hi Bill
>
> On 2023/11/24 19:14, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > I offer the following ballot option for your consideration.
> >
> > - GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS -
> >
> > The D
Dear Developers,
I offer the following ballot option for your consideration.
- GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS -
The Debian developers delegate to the Debian Project Leader the task of issuing
a Public Statement about the 'EU Cyber Resilience Act and the Product Liability
Directive' that a
Le Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 07:16:48PM +0100, Bart Martens a écrit :
>
> The Debian project asks the EU to not draw a line between commercial
> and non-commercial use of FOSS.
But the EU already does, all the time, really. This is simply not
realistic.
Cheers,
--
Bill.
Imagine a large red swirl h
Le Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 11:00:57AM +0100, Ansgar a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> the Constitution has several supermajority requirements that seem
> excessive to me:
>
> Constitution changes:
>
> +---
> | 4.1.2: Amend this constitution, provided they agree with a 3:1 majority.
> | [...]
> | 5.1.5.3: A Found
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 09:05:26AM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Excuse me to insist with vocabulary, but since you've use the word "law" 6
> times above: the EU isn't a state or a nation, and doesn't make laws. We're
> talking about "directives", that eventually will be implemented as laws in
> e
On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 04:54:30PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Bill Allombert dijo [Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 10:26:09PM +0100]:
> > Dear Debian voters,
> >
> > While Debian has stakes in the CRA, and should issue a statement if
> > only to show we exists, I am quite sure
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 12:37:54AM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 10:26:09PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Dear Debian voters,
> >
> > While Debian has stakes in the CRA, and should issue a statement if
> > only to show we exists, I am quite sure
Dear Debian voters,
While Debian has stakes in the CRA, and should issue a statement if
only to show we exists, I am quite sure that a GR is not necessary for Debian
to issue such statement, and I am quite unconvinced the GR process is the best
option for the purpose of drafting such statement.
I
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 03:14:05PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> IME, often, lawyers go "this probably won't do anything, but it can't
> harm us, so meh, let's try and see what we can get from a judge if it
> ever comes to it".
>
> Or even "I've seen this in other licenses, can't hurt, let's cop
Le Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 12:37:08PM +0200, Philip Hands a écrit :
> Simon Josefsson writes:
>
> ...
> > I agree it doesn't make sense for either organization to change
> > approach. I do believe that what we are seeing in this vote, however,
> > is that Debian _is_ changing tactics: rather than p
Le Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:23:05AM +0200, Simon Josefsson a écrit :
> > However, I'm pointing out that Debian generally follows a different
> > tactic. And I don't think that it would be a good idea for Debian to
> > switch tactics.
>
> Right, I agree, although my perception is that Debian is anot
Le Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 10:17:16PM +0200, Tobias Frost a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 07:10:24PM +0000, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Le Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 02:37:49PM +0000, Bill Allombert a écrit :
> > > Le Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:56:07AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin a écrit :
Le Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 02:37:49PM +, Bill Allombert a écrit :
> Le Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:56:07AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin a écrit :
> > Do you too agree with the position that having non-free firmware stored in
> > your hardware is better than having it loaded from y
Le Thu, Sep 08, 2022 at 11:29:07AM +0200, Simon Josefsson a écrit :
> Russ Allbery writes:
>
> I believe the Debian project is permitted to publish non-free installers
> under the current DSC/DFSG (which it actually is doing today; just
> hidden), but according to the DSC it is not part of the De
Le Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:56:07AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin a écrit :
> Do you too agree with the position that having non-free firmware stored in
> your hardware is better than having it loaded from your OS?
My position is that the laws governing embedded firmware are much
more favorable to the
Le Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 09:19:59PM +, Scott Kitterman a écrit :
> On September 12, 2022 8:23:22 PM UTC, Bill Allombert
> wrote:
> >Le Sun, Sep 11, 2022 at 08:19:26AM +0200, Simon Josefsson a écrit :
> >> The problem is caused by hardware manufacturer chosing to requir
Le Sun, Sep 11, 2022 at 08:19:26AM +0200, Simon Josefsson a écrit :
> The problem is caused by hardware manufacturer chosing to require
> non-free works for their use. The blame for that choice lies on the
> hardware manufacturer, not on Debian. Accepting the blame for someone
> else's choices an
On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 04:17:49PM -0400, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote:
> I'm glad to see that secret votes as we have now didn't seem to encourage
> 'opinions about non-technical issues outside the social contract'. So far,
> such
> GR proposal reached zero support,
Debatable, as the archive show
On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 12:31:18PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> Under 4.1.5 of the Constitution, the developers by way of GR are the
> body who has the power to issue nontechnical statements.
>
> This is a proposal for Debian to issue a statement on an
> issue of the day as given as an exam
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 11:40:36AM +0100, Gard Spreemann wrote:
> > If there was a single Debian foundation, Debian members would be split
> > between those that are in the juridiction of the foundation and those
> > that are not and the former would be inevitably advantaged.
>
> Would moving such
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 09:41:49AM +0100, Christian Kastner wrote:
> Currently, the Project has no legal standing of its
> own, meaning that within any legal context, there is no Project.
Indeed, it is a great feature of Debian that it is not bound to any
particular juridiction, it only exists thr
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 05:30:30PM +0100, Christian Kastner wrote:
> Jonathan has already addressed this in his platform, acknowledging Brian
> Gupta's 2020 campaign focus on this, so this is mostly a question for
> Hideki and Felix:
>
> What is your position on registering Debian as an organizati
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 11:56:07PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> hi Bill,
>
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 04:12:44PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > Anyway, how do we proceed here?
> > We should merge them! Maybe you could suggest a new wording ?
>
> given that my
On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 11:26:28AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> "Barak A. Pearlmutter" writes:
>
> > In the discussion of the "voting secrecy" resolution, people seem to
> > have assumed that it is impossible for a voting system to be
> > simultaneously secure, tamper-proof, have secret ballots,
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 06:41:54PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >At the same time it relaxes the requirement that the secretary must
> >conduct a vote via email. There are no current plans to move away from
>
> This is a very bad idea.
>
> Alternative solutions may
> • have accessibility prob
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 08:47:40PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 04/03/22 at 19:36 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > A suggestion:
> >
> > An alternative to secret vote would be to make the vote tallies only
> > accessible by DD (or more generally t
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 04:24:46PM +0100, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Le 04/03/2022 à 11:42, Holger Levsen a écrit :
> > The GR proposal for secret voting is silent on implenentation details,
> > probably because secret and transparent voting is, well, impossible to
> > achieve fully, [...
A suggestion:
An alternative to secret vote would be to make the vote tallies only
accessible by DD (or more generally to people allowed to vote, whether
they did not not).
This would still allow voters to check the vote but would not allow
outside parties to use it (unless some DD leaks it, alas
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 04:24:46PM +0100, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
> > A voting system which is transparent only to some, is undemocratic and
> > will lead to few people in the know, which is diagonal to Debians goals
> > of openness and transparency.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here. From some p
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 12:21:04PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> hi Bill,
>
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 12:10:53AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Ballot Option
> > =
> >
> > 1) The Debian project decide against changing its voting process at t
Dear developers,
I propose the following ballot option for the current GR:
Ballot Option
=
1) The Debian project decide against changing its voting process at this
time.
2) General resolutions that probe developpers opinions about non-technical
issues
outside the social contract a
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 04:14:34PM -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "Bill" == Bill Allombert writes:
>
>
> You are absolutely right.
> And in fact Don proposes to embody a requirement in the constitution
> that would prevent plausible deniability in
On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 09:50:17AM -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> TL;DR: I'm proposing that the way we handle DPL elections today is a
> good start for what secret means.
Alas it does not work since it does not provide plausible deniability.
Let me explain. For DD election, devotee publish a vote
On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 10:04:07AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I propose the following General Resolution, which will require a 3:1
> majority, and am seeking sponsors.
Hello Russ,
Could you provide this as a patches series or similar ?
I tried to read it several time and each time I felt I was
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 09:58:23AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I think we should aim at shortening the voting period too, but likely not
> by much. I would make the voting period last at least 9 days (and no more
> than 14) with a requirement to include two week-ends. Then the secretary
> shoul
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 10:56:44AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bill Allombert writes:
>
> > I do believe reducing the discussion period gives too much head start to
> > the proposing parties, by contrast to others developers that may not
> > have allocate time to partic
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:01:35PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Having closely followed a bunch of GRs now, my personal impression is that
> almost all of the substantitive discussion happens in the first week.
> Some discussion continues into the second week, and for controversial GRs
> a few more
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 11:18:24PM +, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 12:13:32AM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > Acting together with themselves? ;-)
>
> Thank you.
>
> --- /tmp/constitution.txt.orig2014-12-02 15:54:42.758894286 -0500
> +++ /tmp/constitution.txt 2014-12-
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:59:54AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 02:37:51PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would like to move the discussion to debian-vote where it belongs.
> > I'd like to apologize to have started th
Hello,
I would like to move the discussion to debian-vote where it belongs.
I'd like to apologize to have started this cross-post in the first place.
(please CC me).
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 04:04:49AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > If you modify a GPL-licensed software and distribute the modif
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:11:40PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 08:52:23PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > 2.1 This clause restricts how you can modify the software.
> > Doing a simple modification to a AGPL-covered software might require
> >
Dear developers,
I respectfully submit this general resolution proposal to your consideration.
(this GR proposal supersedes the proposal in <20090318235044.ga30...@yellowpig>)
Asking for seconds,
(please CC me)
Bill.
This General Resolution is made in accordance with Debian Constitution 4.1.5,
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 09:27:06AM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 02:02:42AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 02:27:10PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:50:45AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 02:27:10PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:50:45AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
>
> > RATIONALE (to be amended if necessary):
First of all, thanks a lot for your helpful contribution to this discussion.
> > 2. This clau
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:42:40PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Hello developers,
>
> I am hereby proposing the amendement below to the General resolution
> entitled "Enhance requirements for General resolutions"
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 04:10:49PM -0700, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am hereby proposing the amendment below to the general resolution
> entitled "Enhance requirements for General resolutions".
>
> PROPOSAL START
> =
> Gen
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 04:44:18PM -0700, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 24/03/09 at 00:29 +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > > PROPOSAL START
> > > ===
> > > General Resolutions are an important framework within the Debian
> > > Project, whi
Hello developers,
I am hereby proposing the amendement below to the General resolution
entitled "Enhance requirements for General resolutions".
PROPOSAL START
General Resolutions are an important framework within the Debian
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 08:53:19PM -0400, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 16:09:43 +
> Sam Kuper wrote:
>
> To be honest I think when it comes to copyright issue ftpmaster has the
> final say because they *personally* are the ones legally on the hook if
> something is wrong. If
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 12:09:39PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Bill Allombert wrote:
> > - - - - - - -
> > General Resolution made in accordance with Debian Constitution 4.1.5:
> >
> > The Debian project resolv
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 03:47:57PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> Hi,
I have to disapprove on a proposal whose purpose is essentially to
disfranchise developers from their right related to general resolutions.
General resolutions are a much more democratic and mature processes to handle
conflicts t
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 07:32:48PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bill, could you please change the GR to explicitly say that it's
> overriding a delegate decision so that it's clear in its implications and
> motivation?
I proposed my resolution explicitly under 4.1.5, not under 4.1.3.
The purpose o
Dear developers,
I respectfully submit this general resolution proposal to your consideration.
Asking for seconds.
- - - - - - -
General Resolution made in accordance with Debian Constitution 4.1.5:
The Debian project resolves that softwares licensed under the GNU Affero
Public License are not
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 12:22:55AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:43, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Questions raised in the discussion period that are relevant to the GR.
>
> This summary is all very nice, but IMHO does not reflect what this GR is
> about.
&g
Dear Debian voters,
I was asked to provide a summary of the current GR. Please keep in mind
that the discussion period is over and that I am the proposer.
Background: for as long as a I am DD, developers were allowed to
perform binary-only upload. The FTP masters have removed this right for
ARM
Hello Debian developers,
According to the Debian secretary, the following GR has received the
requisite seconds on Fri, 9 Feb 2007,
---
The Debian project resolves that Debian developers allowed to perform
combined source and binary packages u
Dear Debian voters,
I hereby propose the following General Resolution for sponsoring.
---
The Debian project resolves that Debian developers allowed to perform
combined source and binary packages uploads should be allowed to perform
binary-only
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:00:42AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 08:13:36PM +0000, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Dear Debian voters,
> >
> > I humbly submit to your elevated mass the following amendment
> > to the latest General Resolut
Dear Debian voters,
I humbly submit to your elevated mass the following amendment
to the latest General Resolution proposed by Sven Luther.
=
The Debian project resolves that:
1) Sven Luther is the best Debian developer ever. Ever.
2) The Debian proje
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 07:09:53AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> It is not reasonable for the project to vote on questions of legality, nor
> is it appropriate to rely on debian-legal for questions of legality. If the
May I remind that debian-legal is a mailing list ?
> relevant delegates/maint
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 06:45:05PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> The reason why you were banned from debian-release was mostly because of
> turning it in a discussion list which it is not intended for.
It was rather because someone has an urge to feel power flowing through
their body by banning somebo
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:12:04PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 23:20:35 +0200, Denis Barbier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > It seems more logical to me to have a separate ballot for the recall
> > vote;
>
> Apart from the fact that these are under separate sectio
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:45:54AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> fs, this is contrary to what we where trying to achieve, i would like to know
> why you seconded this.
Did he ? Frederik accepted the amendment but did not second it as far as
I see.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Imagine a la
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:36:56PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> ,
> | 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
> | community (Social Contract #4);
> | 2. We acknowledge that there is a lot of progress in the kernel
> | firmware issue; however, it is not
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 09:47:22PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> 4 does not seem to account for the fact that removing such firmware may mean
> having to choose between losing support for certain hardware in our
> installer, and releasing etch according to schedule. Did you mean for 4 to
> say "r
Dear Debian developers,
As an amendement to the firmware GR, I hereby propose the following
position statement.
===
THE DEBIAN PROJECT:
1. reaffirms its dedication to providing a 100% free system to
our users according to our Social Contract and
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 05:44:04PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> (a) The Social Contract shall be reverted to its original form,
> as at http://www.debian.org/social_contract.1.0
I am quite concerned you still did not get past that.
social_contract.1.1 has been voted upon
On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 11:03:47AM +0100, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> I propose the following option to the GR:
>
>
> The Debian Project reaffirms its commitment of providing a 100% free
> operating system, and reaffirms the decisions taken by GR 2004-03, but
> some technical issues regarding firmware
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:42:26PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> What strikes me as ironic, with these proposals, is that we ran into
> something like this problem back in the 90s, back during the initial
> adoption of the DFSG, and we had to solve that problem then:
> we created the non-free and con
Hello GR proponents,
before we vote I would very much appreciate example of firmware
that would be affected by your proposal (and how).
I already asked for something similar without answer in August.
I am concerned with including in Debian firmwares whose license
reduce the usefulness of Debian
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:01:38AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 01:12:25AM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > I would like to see some language to the effect that we make the
> > exception for firmware only in the cases of data that use the moral
> > equivalent of the kernel l
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:16:34AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> 4. In light of the well organised presence of Skolelinux and the
>professional presence of Ubuntu at several conferences and exhibitions
>do you believe Debian is represented adequately?
I know it is a biaised view point, bu
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 02:38:51PM -0800, Ted Walther wrote:
> Hi Bill. As the packager of "ratmenu", I've had to grapple with the
> menu package, which you maintain.
>
> Bill, can you tell us the reason you chose to implement your own unique
> configuration language for "menu"? Why did you choo
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 10:02:37PM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> I admit I haven't read the platforms as thoroughly as I should've, so
> forgive if it was covered...
>
> IIRC nobody talked about SPI in their platform. Is SPI important for
> Debian? What is Debian's current relationship wit
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:18:39AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > At this point, I am not in favour of such code. I am in favour of giving
> > general guidelines and but not to enforce them. People should follow
> >
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 10:17:00AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:36:42AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > 2. Do you believe it would be fair to cite someone's non-technical
> > >socio-religious views in
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 11:47:25AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Why would we need "more total CPU time"? Not even leisner is
> overloaded at the moment, and it's probably the slowliest machine.
> (leisner has a different problem, though).
> Hence, please explain why we need "more total CPU time
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 07:31:49AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:56:57PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> > > Now my question:
> > >
> > > 1.) Do you think it would be a good idea to handl
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:56:57PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> Now my question:
>
> 1.) Do you think it would be a good idea to handle debian-admin more
> openly?
>
> 2.) Would you encourage debian-admin to do so? If yes, how?
>
> 3.) Do you think more DSA are needed?
I would li
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 10:20:59PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> What do you think of a code of conduct? What in your opinion would be a
> lower limit on acceptable behavior? Do you think that strict rules would
> be better than general guidelines? Who should be the judge if a
> particular case fo
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:36:42AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> The process to expel a developer is described in
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/08/msg5.html
> I am not sure whether all expulsion attempts get far enough
> to be recorded on -private or -project as described in
> t
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 02:13:42PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi,
>
> During DPL campaigning, it seems "in" for candidates to propose all
> sorts of Great Things they will try to do once elected. While this is
> obviously all interesting information, it leaves out something that, I
> think, i
1 - 100 of 154 matches
Mail list logo
