On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 06:39:46PM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> I'm not sure why you think so, but I do acknowledge that this
> is a hard thing to implement.
Not wishing to oversimplify, this kind of strategy carries a
high risk of conditioning the horse to walk *only* if there's a
carr
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 03:00:29PM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> I do not think it's part of the DPL responsibilities. I do
> think that it's something that Debian needs and that doing it
> with the DPL hat on is going to make it easier, it's not a
> requirement (most stuff that DPL candida
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 11:24:14AM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> One important example is fixing bugs. Developers spend quite a
> lot of time fixing bugs, and most of the time you don't need to
> be a DD to fix those bugs, anybody can help out fixing more
> bugs.
>
> Another example is the
Hi,
reading some of the replies MJ[0]'s post has received, I feel it's
necessary to express my opinion on some of the points. I wasn't going
to at first in order to keep the noise down, but IMO some views and
opinions expressed by DPL candidates have turned noise into signal.
On Fri, Mar 04,
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:48:50AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Is that 65% for the d-i in the next release, or d-i current? That
> still leaves a third excluded and d-i is *much* better than most, far
> more widely translated more than most of debian. There's a lot of
> other things to improve too.
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:10:45PM -0500, Erinn Clark wrote:
> None of the individuals [...]
Can we _please_ stop refering to people by their nicknames, IRC handles
or whatever it is that you are using? It's bad enough to try and
remember a couple hundred names, don't make it worse by adding
On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 06:15:01PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > >> [ ] Choice 7: Further discussion
>
> That's wrong, voting for 7 means the voter dislikes all options, and
> wants either some other resolution, or no resolution.
"Further discussion". That option means you want
> I beg to differ. After catching up on the list I see that a couple
> of people claim to have ranked option C below further discussion.
>
> Option C was proposed as "AMENDMENT BR3" to this mailing list[1].
>
> There *was* no discussion of it, really. It collected its seconds,
> and ther
> I beg to differ. After catching up on the list I see that a couple
> of people claim to have ranked option C below further discussion.
>
> Option C was proposed as "AMENDMENT BR3" to this mailing list[1].
>
> There *was* no discussion of it, really. It collected its seconds,
> and ther
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 01:58:25PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 05:17:55PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Consider the "amendment" (in name only),
> >Replace lines ^ through $ with the words, "Debian should continue to
> >produce a distribution."
>
> Huh? D
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 01:58:25PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 05:17:55PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Consider the "amendment" (in name only),
> >Replace lines ^ through $ with the words, "Debian should continue to
> >produce a distribution."
>
> Huh? D
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 05:02:09PM +1100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Also, it would show me that the project actually thinks that the
> tasks I listed in my platform are important, and that the project
> stands behind what I'm doing.
I must have missed the memo. Since when does this project w
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 05:02:09PM +1100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Also, it would show me that the project actually thinks that the
> tasks I listed in my platform are important, and that the project
> stands behind what I'm doing.
I must have missed the memo. Since when does this project w
Hi,
> > 4. The DAM is :
> >
> > [x] a critical part of our infrastructure
> > [ ] guilty of not rejecting people when they deserve to be
>
> That's possible, but I'm not sure it should really be the DAMs job to
> exercise a veto on an NM candidate that has otherwise passed the
> proces
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 12:56:19AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I will add that, since the Release Manager is a delegate of the DPL, one
> of the first things I'd be doing in office would be asking the RM, "so,
> what's the lay of the land?"
Why don't you ask right now? (I'm serious)
I
Hi,
> > 4. The DAM is :
> >
> > [x] a critical part of our infrastructure
> > [ ] guilty of not rejecting people when they deserve to be
>
> That's possible, but I'm not sure it should really be the DAMs job to
> exercise a veto on an NM candidate that has otherwise passed the
> proces
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 12:56:19AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I will add that, since the Release Manager is a delegate of the DPL, one
> of the first things I'd be doing in office would be asking the RM, "so,
> what's the lay of the land?"
Why don't you ask right now? (I'm serious)
I
>> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This year we are using a new method of properly determining
> concordcet ballots using the Cloneproof SSD method. The script that
> calculates this is appended below.
Thanks for the clarification Manoj. I see the script does work as
d
>> "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) Your candidate
> 2) None of the above
> 3 and 4) The other two
This is actually incorrect. That means you prefer one of the the other
two over the other, which might seem irrelevant, but under this voting
system makes a difference.
>> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This year we are using a new method of properly determining
> concordcet ballots using the Cloneproof SSD method. The script that
> calculates this is appended below.
Thanks for the clarification Manoj. I see the script does work as
>> "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) Your candidate
> 2) None of the above
> 3 and 4) The other two
This is actually incorrect. That means you prefer one of the the other
two over the other, which might seem irrelevant, but under this voting
system makes a difference
>> Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If you want to select one person, and leave the rest equally, you
> > could put a "1" for the person (or thing) you like, and mark the
> > rest as "2".
> [...]
> unacceptable blank. Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't
> repeat
>> Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If you want to select one person, and leave the rest equally, you
> > could put a "1" for the person (or thing) you like, and mark the
> > rest as "2".
> [...]
> unacceptable blank. Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't
> repea
>> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's so long ago that I didn't remember about that. :-) In fact, I'm not
> sure that SF is useful as a general todo list ... it provides such
> features (various trackers) for each individual project however.
Well, yes. SF (as a project hostin
>> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's so long ago that I didn't remember about that. :-) In fact, I'm not
> sure that SF is useful as a general todo list ... it provides such
> features (various trackers) for each individual project however.
Well, yes. SF (as a project hosti
>> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The explanation is that "Sourceforge for Debian" was of very little
> interest for me several months ago, it's only once you suggested me
> the idea (it's due to you this item in my project), that I considered
> it and thought about the advantag
>> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The explanation is that "Sourceforge for Debian" was of very little
> interest for me several months ago, it's only once you suggested me
> the idea (it's due to you this item in my project), that I considered
> it and thought about the advanta
Hi everyone,
A couple of questions for the candidates:
1. The project's main goal is to produce a 100% free operating system,
and in my opinion we are doing quite well in that respect. But the
question of *how* this goal is achieved is seldom posed. In
particular, I have the feeli
Hi everyone,
A couple of questions for the candidates:
1. The project's main goal is to produce a 100% free operating system,
and in my opinion we are doing quite well in that respect. But the
question of *how* this goal is achieved is seldom posed. In
particular, I have the feel
>> Jordi Mallach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When CosmicRay
CosmicRay?
--
M.
>> Jordi Mallach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When CosmicRay
CosmicRay?
--
M.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I propose that Michael Bramer be ordered to stop sending automated mails
> to other developers (regarding the DDTS or any other subject).
>
> If he does not comply within 24 hours of ratification of this proposal,
> he will be expelled from t
>> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I propose that Michael Bramer be ordered to stop sending automated mails
> to other developers (regarding the DDTS or any other subject).
>
> If he does not comply within 24 hours of ratification of this proposal,
> he will be expelled from
>> Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't repeat. To vote
> > "no, no matter what" do not leave an option black but rank "None Of
> > The Above" higher than the unacceptable choices.
>
> So what exactly is "open for interpretation
>> Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't repeat. To vote
> > "no, no matter what" do not leave an option black but rank "None Of
> > The Above" higher than the unacceptable choices.
>
> So what exactly is "open for interpretatio
>> Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as nothing, since I
> > made no preference of one over the other. So not specifying a rank in
> > the order pretty much alleviates that choice in the tally for that
> > particular vote.
>
>> Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as nothing, since I
> > made no preference of one over the other. So not specifying a rank in
> > the order pretty much alleviates that choice in the tally for that
> > particular vote.
>
>> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's how people voted:
Can any of you guys that recounted the results (you know you did)
confirm that the numbers are right? I can get those numbers only if I
make an assumption which a) I think is wrong b) throws some people's
votes out of the
>> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's how people voted:
Can any of you guys that recounted the results (you know you did)
confirm that the numbers are right? I can get those numbers only if I
make an assumption which a) I think is wrong b) throws some people's
votes out of th
>> Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wouldn't want an elected DPL to blindly do X, because that is what
> he/she promised before the election, when new evidence comes to light
> that indicates that X is bad (eg. perhaps some new solution Y is
> suggested that removes the need for X).
>> Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wouldn't want an elected DPL to blindly do X, because that is what
> he/she promised before the election, when new evidence comes to light
> that indicates that X is bad (eg. perhaps some new solution Y is
> suggested that removes the need for X).
>> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd like to see a list containing that information. If elected DPL, I
> would attempt to ensure that we have one.
"If elected DPL". That's... enlightening.
--
Marcelo
>> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd like to see a list containing that information. If elected DPL, I
> would attempt to ensure that we have one.
"If elected DPL". That's... enlightening.
--
Marcelo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsu
>> Anthony Towns writes:
> Aiee. I have no idea who to vote for.
[LMGOL!]
> So if any of the candidates feel like answering just one more
> question, here you go:
>
> - Why would you be a better DPL than Wichert?
>
> Flame! Be confrontational! Make a statement!
Last year
Hi Ben,
>> Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What I'de like to see in Debian is more of a hierarchy for strong
> decision making, and give every developer a chance to be
> involved. Do not confuse this with more "politics" or placing
> developers above their peers. This has to do with
45 matches
Mail list logo
