Hi,
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 1:26 PM Dominik George
wrote:
> > > The Debian Project make an official statement, along the lines of:
>
If you want the project to issue a statement, the exact statement should be
in the GR, so that people that vote know what they are voting for.
--
Besos,
Marga
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 6:59 PM Roberto C. Sánchez
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 06:15:27PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > Exactly -- if this is an open vote, I'm afraid that would merely force a
> > (possibly) large number of Debian members to not vote at all. Honestly,
> in that
> > ligh
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 11:47 PM Brian Gupta
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 7:45 AM Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 09:41:33AM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:
> > >As an example of a voting options that I am considering ad that does not
> > >fit with your proposals above, I wo
Hi,
> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
>
> Title: Replace "Chairman" with "Chair" throughout the Debian Constitution
>
> All appearances of the word Chairman shall be replaced with the word Chair.
>
> === END GR TEXT ===
It's been 18 days since the GR was proposed and seconded. I'd like to now call
for v
The Debian Constitution is very well written, in a way that is almost completely
ungendered. The only gendered word left is the Chairman of the Technical
Committee. There is no reason for this position to be gendered. Ungendered
alternatives for Chairman are Chair and Chairperson. While both wor
I know it's late and repetitive, but still...
> TEXT TO BE VOTED STARTS HERE
>
> The Debian Project welcomes and encourages participation by everyone.
>
> No matter how you identify yourself or how others perceive you: we
> welcome you. We welcome contributions from everyone as long as the
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> My main problem with this text is that while it may fit to the current
> realities, it makes no sense from a formalistic point of view, as large
> parts of the text seem to imply there was no way for non-packagers yet
> and there were no
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> You say it would be easier if you were DPL. Why do you think
> this is the case?
It is inevitable that people will take you more seriously when you are
the appointed leader than if you are just a random developer. But
also, the abi
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Marcelo E. Magallon
wrote:
> Simple question: How?
>
> (in case it's not clear: since you seem to think it's part of
> the DPL's responsabilities, how do you plan to attract people to
> help with these things?)
I do not think it's part of the DPL responsibilit
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 4:57 AM, Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
> Debian project raise it's expectation every year: higher quality, more
> package, more architectures, more Desktops, etc... (cool).
>
> How do we face the challenge to do more every year?
There are two important things involved: improve our
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Clint Adams wrote:
> Well, in the paid employment part of my life, I have been put in
> positions where I have needed to work with people I disliked, and
> it is not considered professional to refuse on those grounds.
Indeed, I guess most of us have gone through
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
> planet.d.o has became one of the most visible media for Debian, if not
> the most visible one. Do you think it is a good thing?
As has been already said, I'm not sure it's the most visible media.
If it is, it's probably because we are fail
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Kumar Appaiah
wrote:
> My question to you is, do you envision a role for the DPL in fixing
> such inadequate maintenance of important packages, or are you of the
> opinion that is it up to the affected Debian "community" to stop
> whining and step up with some act
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Charles Plessy wrote:
>> * Do you need to come up with a GR to change membership procedures, or is
>> there
>> a different way?
>
> I will cast a GR if I think it is needed. If I am wrong, the result will be
> NOTA, and I will resign as DPL.
You'd really resign
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Hector Oron wrote:
> Secondly, I was wondering how Debian could make it easier for people
> to contribute than other (derivatives and non-derivatives)
> distributions. I came up with a really nice draft howto[1] which I
> would like to bring up to your attention,
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> You got me wrong. I don't want to change our processes to force people to
> adopt new tools. I want to change our processes so that it's easier to
> complete far-reaching projects: in my case, it includes everything from
> working on dpkg-
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> 1/ Do you believe that it's a good move to standardize our packaging tools?
> (example: debhelper is almost standard, quilt is gaining status of the
> standard patch system thanks to the new source format)
I do not think that we shoul
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Following the ‘Membership procedures’ GR, discussion on membership were
> started
> after the Lenny release, but eventually stopped. In this thread it was
> proposed
> to trust DDs to nominate other members and I found the idea very inter
Hi!
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Serafeim Zanikolas wrote:
> With respect to attracting new contributors, please ponder the idea of a
> formal one-on-one mentoring scheme (as opposed to one-off interactions via
> d-mentors).
There's been a mentoring program inside the Debian Women project s
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> After the very painful GR about “Lenny and resolving DFSG violations”,
> discussions started about our voting system, and the fact that it does not
> accomodate well with mixture of supermajority and regular options. Also,
> disagreements wh
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I think that one of issues we have is that there is alot of work
> to be done by some teams, some of them even regularaly mail that
> they need more members, but they seem to have a hard time keeping
> the numbers up, burning the other team mem
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> As a developer, how do you embody the spirit and culture that has made
> Debian a great operating system?
This is a very difficult question, because answering it implies that I
accept that I do embody such spirit and culture, and I find thi
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
> If I understand you correctly, you dissociate yourself from Charles's
> POV about what's part of Debian and thus what needs to be free according
> to DFSG. In another thread you said all other candidates are above NOTA
> for you.
Yes, that
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 4:19 AM, Anthony Towns wrote:
> What's your estimate of the current number of Debian users?
Do "Debian" users include "Debian derivatives" users? :)
I think this question is indeed very tricky, and I don't see the point
of it being posted as a question during the "campai
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> with <20100124144741.gd13...@kunpuu.plessy.org> Charles Plessy came up with a
> draft GR "Simplification of license and copyright requirements for the Debian
> packages.".
>
> I'd like to know from Charles Plessy if the draft from Janua
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
wrote:
> The following question is optional, as it discloses private information, so
> feel free not to answer it. But non the less, I'm curious and would
> appreciate, if you would be willing to answer. So here it goes:
I was actually
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> In my rebuttal, I mention that I lack a sense of vision in your
> platform. In case that wasn't clear, this is because the ideas you
> mention, while they might work to some extent, seem to be a bit
> superficial; I'm afraid they will not s
Hi!
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Clint Adams wrote:
> 5) Is there any part of Debian that should be restricted
> to a small subset of developers, and if so why?
So, I've taken quite a while to ponder about these questions,
particularly this last one. Several people have already replied wit
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> Debian has been known through the years for its excellent support for
> many architectures. In theory, a released arch should be as stable as
> the common/popular archs. (In practice, it is/was pretty close, which
> is good enough.)
Yes,
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
wrote:
>> Without a leader, the press team would have to be delegated by the
>> body of developers, through a GR or similar election, in order to
>> actually be "the voice of Debian".
>
> Leaving out meta questions, when one can be consid
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 2:07 AM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Of course - But we do have a press team. If we were to lack a Leader,
> the press team would just become the contact point for the press,
> right?
Without a leader, the press team would have to be delegated by the
body of developers, through
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 1:32 AM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> What would be different if there was no leader? Where would the
> project lose more? Would it gain in some aspect?
The Constitution gives the DPL a number of duties that would then be
vacant. Even though it wouldn't necessarily lead to total
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 4:30 AM, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> I have a question to the candidates: History has shown that DPLs more
> or less disappear not too long after their period or at least reduce
> their visible efforts immensly. I wonder where you see the reasons for
> this trend, what your i
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Hmm, you got me thinking here on why this happened, as I share your
> impression. Maybe it was because the project as a whole put more care
> into the release process after the massive pain it was to release
> Sarge, a three-year-long pain we
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 09:10:23AM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
>> A new Code of Conduct has already been drafted, but it has never been
>> put into practice.
>
> What are you referring to here when you write
Hi Frans,
Let me first start by stating that I'm sadly concerned about the tone
of your mail.
Nobody claims that the release process has been done perfectly, there
have been mistakes, but we are all human and we can all make mistakes.
It's alright to point those mistakes out so that people can c
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Marc Haber wrote:
> Do you see the diminishing care for our Core infrastructure as a
> problem? Do you have any idea how do sensibilize our new blood for the
> fact that "new packages" doesn't help Debian if our Core stuff is
> diminishing? I know that this is not
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Lucas Nussbaum
wrote:
> During the last debconf, the freeze of squeeze was first announced to
> take place in December, then this decision was cancelled, and now we are
> in March.
> - How do you analyze what happened during last summer? What went wrong?
What wen
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Releasing is regularly the hardest thing that Debian does, not just
> technically but also socially. Apart from the standard issues of setting
> deadlines, RC bug counts being high, and similar difficult technical
> issues, the process seems
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Most of you have answered that it's not possible to regulate the heated
> discussions but it's possible to set a good example. If only the leader
> behaves properly, it will still be difficult to make the climate change.
> But if all the d
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> How, how often, and when do you intend to communicate with the project?
> (please continue reading to understand the context)
>
> In the past there have been "Bits from the DPL" emails which have been nice,
> but during the last couple of
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:17 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> Which project and external Debian-related communications media do you
> follow? and contribute to? As well as a general list I'm interested in
> specific lists (for eg #debian, #debian-devel, debian-de...@l.d.o,
> debian-proj...@l.d.o, the Hard
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs
wrote:
> Do you think current frequency/amount of heated discussions is
> acceptable for the Debian project?
Even though the mailing lists climate is much better than what it was
5 years ago, I think that it still sometimes gets too aggressive,
In Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs
wrote:
> Please finish "In ten years I'd like Debian"
In ten years I'd like Debian to still be thriving as the Universal OS.
Things will obviously have changed. But, if we look back to 1993 when
Debian started, a lot of things were differen
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 4:18 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Imagine a DD contacts you, she wants to setup an infrastructure to finance
> Debian related projects (i.e. paying people to enable them to work on the
> projects that they'd like to do for Debian) but she wants to avoid the
> main mistakes
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 2:56 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> #include
>
> How much time do you currently devote to Debian? How will that amount
> of time change for the DPL term? How will you balance your DPL time
> and time for other Debian activities.
Currently, I'm devoting only a small portion of my
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 2:11 AM, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> So, while not having a particular appointed 2IC, I do plan to ask a
>> lot of people for help on the many things I'd like to accomplish. And
>> I also do plan to mention, thank and appreciate all the help received,
>> no matter how smal
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> The Debian Project receives quite a number of monetary donations as well
> as contributions in kind via several umbrella organization like SPI,
> ffis, debian.ch, etc.
>
> a) What do you think are valid goals to spend this money on?
I'v
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> a little question to all those up for the next DPL:
> Do you plan on taking on a "2IC" or a team?
> If so: Who? And why this/those?
I don't plan to take a 2IC or a DPL team, in the sense of someone else
receiving lea...@.
I do plan, however
Sorry for the double post, but since I signed the previous message with my
not-yet-in-the-keyring key, this one is signed with both the old and the
new keys.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1,SHA256
I've been thinking a lot about this, and I consider that I could try to
improve Debian
I've been thinking a lot about this, and I consider that I could try to
improve Debian from the role of DPL.
I hereby nominate myself for DPL.
I'm currently preparing my platform, and I'm open for any good ideas that
people would like to see a DPL put into action, in order to make Debian
better.
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>So, while the power set of the options is not feasible, we could
> have a slew of options combining the various proposed options, if
> people wanted to vote on a compatible set of options.
No. As I've said, people want to vote
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>If there is sufficient support, we could also scrap the current
> vote, change our ballot, add options to it, or something, and restart
> the vote, but that would need a strong grass roots support (I do not
> think the secretary
I'm confused by options 2 and 5:
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Debian Project Secretary
wrote:
> Choice 2: Allow Lenny to release with proprietary firmware [3:1]
>
> 1. We affirm that our Priorities are our users and the free
> software community (Social Contract #4);
> 2. We acknowl
On 12/7/08, Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> > 5efca670-0e7b-480e-9899-ecce3446e087
> > [ ] Choice 1: Ask the DAMs to postpone the changes until vote or
> consensus.
> > [ ] Choice 2: Invite the DA
Hi!
> | Option: Ask the DAM to postpone the changes
> |
> | The Debian Project, by way of a general resolution of its developers, asks
> | the Debian Account Managers to postpone the implementation of the changes
> | described on the debian-devel-announce mailing list (Message-id:
> | <[EMAIL PROT
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 8:09 AM, Lucas Nussbaum
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think that your
> formulation for the now-only option in this GR is too complex.
> It mixes many different questions:
> - do you want to thank Joerg Jaspert for raising this
On 3/15/07, Sam Hocevar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My main approach to make it fun again to work on Debian is to
reduce the frustration. You cannot have fun doing something if your
contributions are ignored, if you cannot access the resources you need
to do the work, if your administrative re
Hi!
This is for Gustavo and Sam, who have both stated in their campaigns
that they want to bring back the fun to Debian. Now, I'm all for
Debian being more fun, but I wonder:
How do you plan to bring back the fun? What are the specific steps
required to achieve such a goal?
--
Besos,
Marga
-
Andreas,
It is well known that you are the Debconf magician, and that without
your work, Debconfs would either not happen or be a complete fiasco
compared to the Debconfs we are used to by now.
So, if you are elected as DPL, will you stop doing that work? If you
don't, then how will you manage t
Anton's ammendment is considered by Manoj to be "implicitly" modifying
the DFSG, since the DSFG say that a license must "allow
modifications", and with Anton's reading this would be "allow
modifications".
There's no way to "implicitly" modify the DFSG. So, to be clear,
please include the diff of
On 2/1/06, Yavor Doganov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is not an unbelievable conclusion. If I include your personal
> position about, let's say, software freedom in my documentation under
> GFDL, I have to put it in an Invariant section, otherwise people would
> be able to change/twist your wor
On 2/1/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could some one tell me why including the invariant sections of
> a GFDL licensed work in main would not require us to modify the DFSG
> or the social contract?
>
> Specifically, I am looking at the SC:
> >> 1. Debian will
On 1/25/06, Fabian Fagerholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 13:04 -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> > What would be the point of your proposal? I mean, if this proposal
> > won, it would be exactly the same as if the "no GFDL in main at all"
On 1/24/06, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (2) all copyright holders state that the requirement "You may not use
> technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of
> the copies you make or distribute" in section 2 is waived with respect to
> copies you make
On 1/21/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So, I am seeking arguments and guidance from the developer
> body whether issue 1 can, and should, be decidable by a general
> resolution, or whether the freeness of the GFDL licensed works
> without invariant clauses is incontr
On 11/21/05, Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do not see any reason for this GR since I cannot remember any serious
> request to make -private mails public where this action would really
> have been beneficial for the outside world.
The reasons were stated in one of the first emails of
67 matches
Mail list logo
