On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 11:43:22AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> We believe we have one volunteer already - Daniel Gröber. It would be
> much better if this task wasn't done by Sean or me. Daniel: thanks,
> and are you still up for this ?
Yes.
--Daniel <3
signature.asc
rely willing to answer questions from any
project member.
Kind regards,
Daniel
ng if that's your goal.
I won't.
# Support
Ian, you have my full support in doing what is necessary to stop the
bleeding and I'll be happy to volunteer to help with the dak hack job if
that still makes sense with Simon's keyring idea on the table.
--Daniel
On Fri, Apr 04, 202
ue to be spectacular!
Best Regards
--
Daniel Lenharo
Curitiba - Brazil
www.lenharo.eti.br
31D8 0509 460E FB31 DF4B
9629 FB0E 132D DB0A A5B1
OpenPGP_0xFB0E132DDB0AA5B1.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
eeping me from even trying. I never could figure out why exactly it didn't
go forward though? It's even in [dpkg-source] already so what happened
there?
[dpkg-source]:
https://manpages.debian.org/unstable/dpkg-dev/dpkg-source.1.en.html#Format:_3.0_(git)
--Daniel
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ats what you're
seeing.
What bugs are you looking at? Please be more concrete.
Thanks,
--Daniel
On Wed 2023-11-22 19:31:34 +, Bill Allombert wrote:
> 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
I have a similar thinking. In particular, Debian has a treasurer team
that should be able to make a reasonable decision about this without us
having to drag the entire project in it. Were they consulted about this?
Did they disagree with you, and is this your attempt at overriding them?
No, there
On Thu 2021-11-11 07:56:24 -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> 1/ The assertion "we all can acknowledge is confused and outdated" is
>far fom the case. This and other discussions on the matter are
>strong evidence that "we can all acknowledge" is a
>mischaracterization.
I'm legitimatel
On Sat 2021-11-06 11:32:35 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Pierre-Elliott Bécue - 06.11.21, 11:06:58 CET:
>> That being said, the name is indeed outdated, and "Debian Archive
>> Team" sounds quite nice.
>
> Agreed. I like this name.
Yes, please. "Debian Archive Team" is fine. This is fair amo
The board of the Free Software Foundation (FSF) have issued a statement
regarding the election of Richard Stallman:
https://www.fsf.org/news/statement-of-fsf-board-on-election-of-richard-stallman
Richard Stallman has issued a statement as well:
https://www.fsf.org/news/rms-addresses-the-free-so
On 01.04.21 10:19, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> Bonus points for writing the entire reply as an attached .doc, or even
> better .ppt, file (MS Office 1997 version or earlier).
Additional bonus points for using Comic Sans!
Cheers
Daniel
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
rtant
enough to deserve their real effort.
If i have time to spam to list, my opinion will be stronger than a
opinion from a person who are doing an important work and can't reply a
lot e-mails?
Is it really serious?
Best regards
--
Daniel Lenharo de Souza
Debian Brasil
FB0E13
Em 26/03/2021 07:24, Jonas Smedegaard escreveu:
Seconded - on the condition that Timo Weingärtner replaces his previous
proposal with one one including above edit.
- Jonas
Same here!
--
Daniel Lenharo
Curitiba - BR
OpenPGP_0xFB0E132DDB0AA5B1.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
posicion. OK.
Even don't need to explicit how individuals voted. however, just a
statement, even done by DPL, i don't feel comfortable with this.
cheers
--
Daniel Lenharo
Curitiba - BR
OpenPGP_0xFB0E132DDB0AA5B1.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
OpenPGP_signature
Descriptio
llow it if it completes within my term.
-Jonathan
i didn't understand why people can't sign the letter individually.
I wouldn't like to see my name associate with an action like this.
cheers
--
Daniel Lenharo
Curitiba - BR
OpenPGP_0xFB0E132DDB0AA5B1.asc
Descript
I would like to propose.
>
> Cancel this year's in-person Debian Developers Conference DebConf20
> --
>
Best Regards!
--
Daniel Lenharo de Souza
Curitiba - Brasil
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Fri 2019-03-22 09:32:55 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I'm probably missing something, but it doesn't sound like a lot of work
> to me? It's "just" a service that:
> - gets notified of the existence of a git repo + tag to upload
> - fetches that git repo + tag
> - checks signature / confirm that
On Mon 2019-04-01 15:17:27 -0400, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> On 19-03-31 03 h 39, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>>
>> Statement: every Debian package must be maintained in Git on salsa and
>> every Debian Developer with upload rights to the archive should have
>> commit/push right to every pack
Hi
On 3/14/19 8:43 AM, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>
> On 2019/03/14 13:34, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>> Soo, lets ensure we do not have another week:
>>
>> I hereby nominate myself for the DPL election 2019.
>
> I hereby nominate myself for the 2019 DPL election.
Thanks yo
On Tue 2019-03-12 08:45:46 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bdale Garbee writes:
>
>> Chris, thank you for your service! Two terms as DPL is a serious
>> contribution and commitment to Debian, and I greatly appreciate it!
>
> +1. Thank you so much for everything you've done for Debian over the past
On 10/03/2019 04:44, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> This is an obviously untrue signature.
>
Why do you want to taint the elections with more bullying, insulting and
disrespectful comments?
g on this list. Nobody should feel an obligation to serve
out their term in a role like this. In Australian politics, there are
no fixed terms and betting on when the PM will decide to call an
election is all part of the fun.
Regards,
Daniel
--
Debian Developer
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Enviado desde mi iPhone
Enviado desde mi iPhone
On Thu 2016-07-21 11:15:57 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> A "Chairman" is a person. A "Chair" may be an object.
>
> I don't think anyone will misinterpret your proposed new wording into
> thinking the TC has a physical chair that someone sits on, but the
> s/Chairmain/Chair/ you apply does to me s
On 18 March 2016 07:40:47 GMT+08:00, Paul Wise wrote:
>To the candidate:
>
>Have you read Lars Wirzenius' not-platform?
>
>http://blog.liw.fi/posts/dpl-2016-not-platform/
>
>Do you have any thoughts on it?
>
>Does Debian need the Social Committee proposed by Lars?
I feel that more personal contac
rs[1]
If Irish developers were to try and organize a MiniDebConf for the
weekend of 18-19 March 2017, would you be happy to support that as DPL
and provide some funding if necessary to make it happen?
Happy St Patrick's Day everybody
Regards,
Daniel
1.http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-13166265
ody else divide it up. To put it another way,
if the DPL can only make three Debian decisions per day without
impacting his quota of decisions for job, family, etc, what should they be?
Regards,
Daniel
1. http://www.wired.com/2011/04/judges-mental-fatigue/
they
vote NOTA, they should also consider asking Mehdi to withdraw or making
the concerns public. I'm not aware of any such concerns myself.
Regards,
Daniel
On 12/02/2014 06:13 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> This is an interesting proposal. But it's a big change, so I think it
> should be thoroughly discussed before I could second it.
I agree some discussion would be useful, but seems like it's a lot
simpler than all the other noodling with term-limits tha
On 10/17/2014 12:06 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes ("Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of
> init systems"):
>> nevertheless, runit behaves differently when it is pid 1 than when it is
>> used in a subordinate role to another initsystem.
On 10/17/2014 11:26 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes ("Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of
> init systems"):
>> The implication here appears to be troubling for any upstream who wants
>> to rely on specific features of a given initsystem.
On 10/17/2014 03:44 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It is now clear that we will have a vote on this issue. I think that we
> should use this opportunity to clarify the Project's position, and that's
> not something that would be achieved if "Further Discussion" were to
> win.
>
> I am theref
On 10/17/2014 10:33 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> If the fix is not easy then we have three options: the release team
> mark it `jessie-ignore', the GNOME maintainers fix it, or GNOME is
> removed from jessie.
The implication here appears to be troubling for any upstream who wants
to rely on specific f
On 19/01/14 03:25, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
>> In general, I've been quite unhappy with the excessive invocation of
>> the TC recently, with developers seeming to view this as a first,
>> rather than absolute last, resort.
> [...]
>
> Constitutionally, a GR is the last resort in that it can overrule
On 03/29/2013 01:46 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 01:35:59PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
>> I'm open to other theories as to the cause. I am, however, a bit surprised
>> that you'd completely dismiss the theory I've proposed so quickly.
>> let you know that I regularly bu
On 08/30/2011 12:29 PM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Humm… An idea could be:
I like Gunnar's proposal. Some nitpicks for clarity:
> ‣ The term is defined to be for one year, with the possibility of one
> automatic renewal
> ‣ If by (election date + 10 months)
This should be something like "between (e
Unsubscribe.
Thank You,
Dan Lane
Senior Systems Administrator
The American Board of Family Medicine, Inc.
(859) 269-5626 - Ext. 1293
(859) 338-8734 - Cell Phone
dl...@theabfm.org - Email
"This email message and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged.
If you are not the intended re
Hi Wouter--
You probably didn't mean to have this to come out this way, but:
On 03/23/2010 01:49 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Charles:
>
> In your platform, in the "Program" section, you mention four ideas that
> could reasonable be described as being about the things that,
> respectively, the D
On 03/23/2010 11:03 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> The second option aims at clarifying what is the source of the Debian
> operating
> system. It is controversial.
To some of us, "the Debian operating system" is at least as much about
the packaged source as it is about the packaged binaries.
If y
thanks for the detailed answer, good summary of what is also my
impression (that i have about it, as an unqualified observer).
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: daniel.baum...@panthera-systems.net
Internet: http://people.panthera
On 03/12/2010 10:55 AM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I personally don't plan to have neither a DPL board, nor a 2IC.
why not?
--
Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: daniel.baum...@panthera-systems.net
Internet: http://people.pan
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> What about:
> General Resolution sponsorship requirements
sounds like package sponsorship requirements to me. therefore i suggest
to be extra clear and change it to 'Requirements for General Resolution
Sponsorship'.
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgun
7;s not yet clear what is required, then clear that up first,
already. I don't care if someone won't do maintenance if they can't
maintain according the legal standards that could cause ftpmaster
*personal* legal trouble.
Regards,
Daniel
--
And that's my crabbing done for
Robert,
I'm not a DD but I have been watching the lists and I think you are
flogging a dead horse, one that has been buried in fact. Choose your
battles and you'll have more good will when you make constructive
proposal and actions post-lenny.
As for trying to bully people about consitution and
e revised to be less absolutist.
Debian needs such flexibility, in my opinion. Since I'm not a
developer, I don't feel qualified to really speak to such a change.
Daniel
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism
--
Daniel Moerner
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
nd that's it.
+1. I'm dropping about a mailing list a year, which is a pretty slow
exit...
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
cedents; I'm talking about similar groups I've served
on in the past.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sadly, I'm having trouble coming up with a nice, catchy name that would
avoid confusion. Something like "Debian Outside Contributor" is clear
enough, but it's more awkward and sounds kind of negative to my ear.
Does anyone have a better suggestion?
Daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
you not respond to discussions about it; that seems
to work.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
s good as it gets -- and running the risk of in the
> end not achieving much at all.
Totally agreed. Also, I think it was both courteous and wise to try
to respond promptly; if you let a question sit, in my experience, it
becomes harder to answer.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
Signed Part:Bad signature from 18A0CC8D5706A4B4 Simon Richter <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]>]]
> Hello,
>
> I hereby nominate myself as a candidate for the post of the Debian
> Project Leader in 2007.
>
>Simon
> [[End of PGP Signed Part]]
--
.''`.
: :' : Danie
The Shorts are out! The Gap is Good! Take advantage!
Company: Red Reef Laboratories
Symbol: RREF
Price: $0.215
RREF has been on a steady rise for a week with HUGE volume. Now the
shorts created a gap providing a second chance to get in on RREF.
It's $0.215, and will climb hard back to $0.40 by
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:21:08AM +0200, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> Le samedi 30 septembre 2006 à 20:53 -0700, Daniel Burrows a écrit :
> > --- snip here ---
> > == Reaffirm support for Anthony Towns as the Project Leader ==
&
wording (whether or not you accept
the above change):
--- snip here ---
The Debian project reaffirms its support of Anthony Towns as the
Debian project leader. However, it neither endorses nor supports
any projects that Mr Towns may lead or participate in outside
Debian.
---
Debian Etch,
> | as long as we are legally allowed to do so, and the firmware is
> | distributed upstream under a license that complies with the DFSG.=20
> `
I second this proposal.
Daniel Ruoso
signature.asc
Description: Esta é uma parte de mensagem assinada digitalmente
s not the result of a decision of
the
Debian Project.
The Debian Project wishes success to projects funding Debian or helping
towards the release of Etch.
-
I second this proposal with or without typos...
And I hope my ISP's MTA doesn't mess with my signature... :)
daniel
signat
Qui, 2006-08-31 às 09:19 +0100, Daniel Ruoso escreveu:
> Qua, 2006-08-30 às 23:06 +0200, Frederik Schueler escreveu:
> > So, we propose this GR:
> >
> > 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free software
> > community (Social Contract #4);
> >
s part of Debian Etch, without further conditions.
Seconded.
Daniel Ruoso
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nd the politics are important to me, but I'm undecided about
whether that's enough in the face of noob-friendliness problems.
Another factor is what I can find out about other distros'
legal and/or political situations).
Cheers,
Daniel
Please cc as I am not subscribed to -vote (as I
ease etch, and, therefore, the next Debian release,
codename etch, will still contain sourceless/non-free firmwares. The
Debian Project apologize for this, and will continue to work on finding
a way to solve this issue.
I think this needs a 3:1 majority...
Daniel
signature.asc
Description
nt
Andreas,
If you lie and seek to misrepresent the truth, to your own DPL team, why
do you expect to be trusted with the entire Project? Additionally, do
you believe that a DPL team can be effective and successful if they are
provided with incorrect information?
Cheers,
Daniel
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ocess were
successful? Would you delegate in this manner again? If not, how do
you propose to handle delegations in your term?
Looking forward to your responses.
Cheers,
Daniel
[0]: http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2005/03/msg00494.html
[1]: Please feel free to correct this figure.
sig
o the transparent copies problem...
As I said before, I still didn't buy this argument, but I have to admit
it has some logic...
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
rrelevant.
Are you sure? I just explained it does changes DFSG3, and therefore, it
should *as the constitution says* require a 3:1 majority. The
constitution would be violated if manoj didn't apply that.
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
n't force you to use
in the same way and with the same text the original author did.
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
g text
asking the user to press OK, I still can display 3 lines (that's all
needed to satisfy this clause) with an text by myself in a splash
screen. And only if it's an interative program. There is nothing here
that looks like invariant sections.
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
t freedom 3 is more restrictive than freedom
1. It still looks like you're forcing it to mean what you want...
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Em Qui, 2006-02-02 às 18:49 +, Stephen Gran escreveu:
> This one time, at band camp, Daniel Ruoso said:
> > > So, if I were to write a program, which at startup displays the
> > > entiretity of the GNU Manifesto, and wrote a license, which would be
> > > GPL with
plays the
> entiretity of the GNU Manifesto, and wrote a license, which would be
> GPL with the addition that the startup display may not be modified,
> only amended, you would consider this program a DFSG program and it
> could go into main?
IMHO, it's non-free. It's complet
Em Qui, 2006-02-02 às 12:44 +0200, Anton Zinoviev escreveu:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 06:32:50PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > I must remeber that, in this case, you're not letting the user judge if
> > something fits or not to his needs.
> > This breaks freedom 1[1],
Em Qua, 2006-02-01 às 23:33 +0200, Anton Zinoviev escreveu:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 03:28:30PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > This was what I tried to show you, not the opposite. My interpretation
> > of DFSG3 is guided by freedom 1, which says "adapt it to your needs"
you one
document[1] that DFSG clearly refers to which contradicts your
interpretation. Can you show me something like this that contradicts my
argument?
daniel
[1] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
27;t see any references that bases this interpretation, except by
reading the DFSG without taking into account anything else, like, er...,
it's history.
daniel
[1] I've said this before. DFSG3 clearly refers to Freedom 1 and Freedom
3. So, if you're in doubt, you could use it to unde
7;s *up to the user* to decide if something fit to his
needs or not, and invariant sections *prevents the user* from deciding
that.
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
; or with related matters, or of legal, commercial, philosophical,
> ethical or political position regarding them".
How bad... To me, it's like using one thing as media to unrelated stuff,
and as most people would remove the unrelated stuff, they force it to be
there anyway.
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
is ambiguity I realy belive that we need to modify DFSG
> in some future GR.
Sorry, but I don't think that's possible. Your proposal means adding a
"except for GFDL invariant sections" in DFSG3. Even if it automatically
doesn't change that text, it does change it's use,
oving
invariant sections.
Was this already suggested to FSF?
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
n to split it into two GRs... And I don't think a
proposal to include it in main even being considered non-free would get
enough seconds...
What I would suggest to the project's secretary is to re-start this GR
process, as it seems too confusing by now (can it be done?)...
daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ight? Is this clause enforcable to your private copies (considering it
as a bug)? or just to the copies you distribute...
I mean, I know the license says "the copies you make or distribute",
but, by definition, wouldn't it apply only to the act of distribution?
daniel
--
To UNS
orated into free
programs."
So... If the intention was to refute the interpretation of the GFDL
license that thinks the other problems do exist? Shouldn't it be forced
to say that the problems doesn't exist? If the amendment recognizes that
the other problems exists but still wants to inc
Em Sex, 2005-12-09 às 00:49 +1000, Anthony Towns escreveu:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 11:24:52AM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > There's a lot of personal information inside debian-private,
> There is? I got 36 of 494 messages (7%) for the month I did, with an
> additional 55 o
Em Qui, 2005-12-08 às 08:07 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane escreveu:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 01:39:15AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 02:47:07PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> >> The first type of publication could embrace the entire content of
> &
Em Qui, 2005-12-08 às 01:39 +0100, Wouter Verhelst escreveu:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 02:47:07PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > I hope this is closer to a consensus...
> Afraid not. This proposal basically creates a second class of people --
> those who we want to sign NDA'
Em Qui, 2005-12-08 às 00:08 +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin escreveu:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 02:47:07PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > The first type of publication could embrace the entire content of
> > debian-private, but restrictions will be applied for those who want to
> >
hope this is closer to a consensus...
daniel
signature.asc
Description: Esta é uma parte de mensagem assinada digitalmente
Em Sex, 2005-12-02 às 21:16 +0100, Florian Weimer escreveu:
> * Daniel Ruoso:
> > In accordance with principles of openness and transparency, Debian
> > will seek to declassify and publish posts of historical or ongoing
> > significance made to the Debian Private Mailin
nouncements or posts that have no content after
information is removed (according to the above constraint),
will not be published, unless the author requests they be
published;
---
This way, I think we would have a *real* declassification process.
dani
our internals! if we do, we should really do
it, not just publish some selected things, it can't be called
declassification if we select which materials are of our interest to be
public.
daniel
P.S.: I know, the current proposal isn't exactly that way (I agreed to
make it happen), but th
Em Sáb, 2005-11-19 às 12:29 +1000, Anthony Towns escreveu:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 11:41:34AM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > --
> > Thus, I propose that the Debian project resolve that the process
> > defined in GR Proposal 2 will be applied *only* for the future content
oposal 2
is rejected.
daniel
signature.asc
Description: Esta é uma parte de mensagem assinada digitalmente
27;t get special treatment; they can be vetoed
> by the post's author though
>- specific details for overriding the team's decisions by the
> developers
Ok, Following what I've said in the last post, I second this proposal.
daniel
signature.asc
Description: Esta é uma parte de mensagem assinada digitalmente
w (Manoj's changes, no comment on original)
>Daniel Ruoso (original preferred over Manoj's changes)
> Five's enough to second a proposal, but only if they all second the same
> one :)
I change my position as it seems that's needed to take it to the vote.
I cons
will be deferred;
>
> - requests by the authors of posts, or others who would be affected
> by the publication of the post, will be taken into account by
> the declassification team;
>
> - the list of posts to be declassified will be made available to
>
On Monday 11 April 2005 04:41 pm, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> For those who are tired of pressing page up/page down to understand the
> listing... a s/Option \d/$candidates[$1]/ge is helpfull...
Or you could look at Manoj's cool graph. I think it's linked as the
"statis
.
Anthony Towns defeats None of the Above by ( 390 - 101) = 289 votes.
Andreas Schuldei defeats Angus Lees by ( 307 - 99) = 208 votes.
Angus Lees defeats None of the Above by ( 261 - 184) = 77 votes.
Andreas Schuldei defeats None of the Above by ( 346 - 120) = 226
votes.
daniel
--
To
received by 23:59:59 UTC on April 10th, 2005.
Do you mean, "less than two days before"?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:53:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 11:04:14AM +0100, Igor Genibel wrote:
> > On Monday 21 March 2005 10:54, Luk Claes wrote:
> >
> > Sorry for this mistake :/
> >
> > /me bashes himself
>
> Maybe the ballot should have had a reply-to to the vot
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 10:04:23AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 06:33:16PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:25:55PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >> > vendors, et al
1 - 100 of 164 matches
Mail list logo
