On Sunday, June 30, 2024 1:45:15 PM EDT Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jun 2024 at 19:28, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Aigars Mahinovs writes:
> > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the intention is to have two
> > > technically redundant data points saved into the archive:
> > >
> > > 1)
On Thursday, June 27, 2024 6:07:33 AM EDT Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
> Refusing to make a decision is a decision. Ansgar has explicitly set a
> requirement for including the checksums of the end result Debian source
> package in the tag. This requirement was not withdrawn or overridden by
> other FTP m
On June 26, 2024 4:26:03 AM UTC, Simon Richter wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 6/26/24 03:42, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>
>> Do you actually check that the contents of the source *package* (after all
>> operations done by dpkg-source and possibly other tools) actually match what
>> you were looking at before
On June 25, 2024 9:02:45 AM UTC, Philip Hands wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes:
>
>> Do you have any examples of problems that this would have avoided
>> (xz-utils isn't one - due to the way it's releases are done, it
>> wouldn't be suitable for tag2up
ream
>git tree would also be side-stepped by the Debian maintainer simply using
>only the git tree as upstream and completely ignoring the tarballs. It
>would not provide a solution for code hidden in the upstream git itself
>that the maintainer missed.
>
>On Mon, 24 Jun 2024, 2
being used just because we are used to the weaker
>approach.
>
>On Mon, 24 Jun 2024, 18:34 Scott Kitterman, wrote:
>
>>
>> None of that changes the fact that it's what they signed. Historically,
>> the project has found that useful and I think it still is.
On June 24, 2024 2:48:49 PM UTC, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 19:17 Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>> As an example, I think the fact that I can download any source package in
>> the
>> archive and cryptographically verify who uploaded it and that it'
On Sunday, June 23, 2024 1:55:00 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > On Sunday, June 23, 2024 11:43:47 AM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> You are entitled to believe that my analysis is wrong. You are not
> >> entitled to claim that I didn'
On Sunday, June 23, 2024 1:16:38 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > On Sunday, June 23, 2024 11:48:09 AM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> As mentioned in the summary, I believe we've found a resolution to this
> >> problem provided that the FTP
On Sunday, June 23, 2024 11:43:47 AM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > I think that can work both ways. I am old enough to have seen many
> > instances of some new hotness coming along and any objection to it being
> > swept aside because it was
On Sunday, June 23, 2024 11:48:09 AM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > First, as I understand the position of the FTP Masters involved in this
> > discussion (for clarity, I'm a non-delegated member of the FTP Team
> > (i.e. FTP Assistant)), their v
On Sunday, June 23, 2024 10:57:26 AM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Simon Richter writes:
> > The difference is the expectation that the delegates will continue to
> > perform this work and therefore need to deal with the long term
> > impact. One-time contributions are welcomed as long as they are a n
On Sunday, June 23, 2024 10:46:33 AM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Matthias Urlichs writes:
> > On 23.06.24 04:45, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> that just feels wrong to me. Rude. Dismissive. And self-defeating
> >> for Debian as a whole.
> >
> > 100% agree. Though again: that *feels* rude and dismissi
On June 21, 2024 6:35:48 PM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes:
>
>> This whole thread is about a draft GR to override a FTP Master decision
>> based on a claim that they had refused to engage with the tag2upload
>> developers for years to explain t
On June 21, 2024 4:26:41 PM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Ansgar 🙀 writes:
>> On Fri, 2024-06-21 at 08:29 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>>> Wait, why would I ever want to upload a 3.0 (native) package for a
>>> non-native package with the tooling as it is today in Debian?
>
>> As far as I understan
On June 17, 2024 10:56:11 AM UTC, Ian Jackson
wrote:
>Joerg Jaspert writes ("Re: [RFC] General Resolution to deploy tag2upload"):
>> On 17262 March 1977, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> > I would ask you not to characterise the disagreement we are having as
>> > merely over a technical detail.
>>
>> Y
On June 17, 2024 5:29:02 AM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes:
>
>> I don't equate responsibility and blame. If I'm responsible for
>> something and it blows up, then that means I'm responsible to help clean
>> up the mess, regardles
On June 17, 2024 5:23:41 AM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Bastian Blank writes:
>
>> But maybe you can answer the question: Given the .dsc file, how can
>> you, and more critical the public, verify that you and only you signed
>> that upload?
>
>Why is this, specifically, important?
>
>I can turn
On Monday, June 17, 2024 12:25:28 AM EDT Louis-Philippe VĂ©ronneau wrote:
> On 2024-06-15 5 h 03 a.m., Philip Hands wrote:
>
> > Sean Whitton writes:
> > ...
> >
> >> The ftpmaster team have refused to trust uploads coming from the
> >> tag2upload service. This GR is to override that decision.
>
On Sunday, June 16, 2024 3:59:40 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > Yes. I think that's the core of the disagreement. In my view, when I
> > type the passphrase for my key, I'm asserting responsibility for the
> > contents of what I&#x
On June 16, 2024 6:23:18 PM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes:
>
>> I think it's just that I view a signature by a mechanized service as
>> something different that a signature made by an actual person.
>> Technically you are correct, but I think
On Sunday, June 16, 2024 12:46:41 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > I agree that there's a risk that what the uploader thought they were
> > uploading and what they actually uploaded are different, but that's
> > independent of tag2u
On Sunday, June 16, 2024 12:01:31 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > Yes and no. The difference is that currently, I can download the source
> > package and verify it myself. Not just who signed it and with what key,
> > but that the signature verif
On Sunday, June 16, 2024 12:26:48 AM EDT Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sat 15 Jun 2024 at 06:03pm +02, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > On 17258 March 1977, Sean Whitton wrote:
> >> So, why am I proposing a GR?
> >
> > This one took me by surprise, honestly.
> >
> > Looking into my notmuch, the la
On June 16, 2024 6:44:35 AM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes:
>
>> I appreciate the thought and effort that went into this review.
>
>> If I'm following your description correctly, the tag2upload "package" flow
>> i
On June 16, 2024 4:38:03 AM UTC, Sean Whitton wrote:
>Hello,
>
>On Fri 14 Jun 2024 at 06:06pm GMT, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm a bit confused by the claim that no infrastructure changes are needed for
>> this to go forward.
>>
>> If I hav
On Tuesday, June 11, 2024 9:39:04 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Below is the security review that I did of the tag2upload design.
>
> I am not a neutral party, in the sense that I think tag2upload is a good
> idea and should be deployed. However, I do these types of security
> reviews
On Friday, June 14, 2024 9:23:03 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > Maybe. Maybe this breaks the thing into two parts in a way it wasn't
> > before If you verify the signature on the source package and the key is
> > in the keyring, you know that t
On Friday, June 14, 2024 6:37:40 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > On Friday, June 14, 2024 5:25:33 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> It requires that the signature on the Git tag be correctly checked and
> >> that fingerprint be put into the *.d
On Friday, June 14, 2024 5:25:33 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ansgar 🙀 writes:
> > On Fri, 2024-06-14 at 11:45 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> Sorry, I don't understand. What isn't complete? I just explained how
> >> dak could continue to enforce all the same authorization checks as it
> >> does
On Friday, June 14, 2024 2:45:55 PM EDT Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > On June 13, 2024 3:29:21 PM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> I don't understand why this would be a blocker given that dak can redo
> >> the authorization check at the same
On June 14, 2024 10:01:38 AM UTC, Sean Whitton wrote:
>Hello zigo,
>
>On Fri 14 Jun 2024 at 11:39am +02, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>> Please read his lightning talk "debconf22-94-lightning-talks.webm". Here's
>> the
>> first to talk in the video:
>>
>> https://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/deb
On June 13, 2024 3:29:21 PM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes:
>
>> I agree that this isn't a major design issue, but I think it is
>> something that I think needs to be addressed before deployment of
>> tag2upload. The need is certainly rar
On June 13, 2024 10:46:59 AM UTC, Ian Jackson
wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: [RFC] General Resolution to deploy tag2upload"):
>> If I am understanding you correctly, tag2upload is only relevant to the XZ
>> Utils type attack if the maintainer uses the ups
On June 13, 2024 3:02:48 PM UTC, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>On 17259 March 1977, Ian Jackson wrote:
>
>>> Thanks. Then possibly it is sufficient for ftpmaster just to disable
>>> tag2upload's whole key until the keyring update is pushed.
>> I'm not sure this is a sufficient answer. We don't want u
On June 12, 2024 8:03:59 PM UTC, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 19:24, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>
>> "Adam D. Barratt" writes:
>> > On Wed, 2024-06-12 at 10:43 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>
>> >> There was more confusion about this point than I had anticipated, so I
>> >> want to em
On Wednesday, June 12, 2024 10:20:45 AM EDT Ian Jackson wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: [RFC] General Resolution to deploy
tag2upload"):
> > On Tuesday, June 11, 2024 6:25:02 PM EDT Sean Whitton wrote:
> > > - it improves the traceability and aud
On Tuesday, June 11, 2024 6:25:02 PM EDT Sean Whitton wrote:
> - it improves the traceability and auditability of our source-only
> uploads, in ways that are particular salient in the wake of xz-utils.
As I understand it, Debian was affected by the xz-utils hack, in part, because
some artifacts
On April 4, 2024 12:59:34 PM UTC, Andreas Tille wrote:
>Hi Scott,
>
>Am Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 12:42:11PM + schrieb Scott Kitterman:
>> I'm interested to understand what you think this has to do with the DPL
>> election or the role of the DPL within the project
On April 4, 2024 12:32:45 PM UTC, Andreas Tille wrote:
>Hi,
>
>in the light of the previous discussion I have a question to all voters.
>Due to bug #1066377 more than 30 testing removal warnings hit my mailbox
>today (I stopped counting after 30). While the Debian Med package
>clustalo is the
On November 13, 2023 12:29:20 PM UTC, "Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer"
wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 07:55, Aigars Mahinovs wrote:
>[snip]
>> Even regardless of the specific legal wording in the legislation itself, the
>> point 10
>> of the preamble would be enough to to fix any "bug"
On November 12, 2023 5:09:26 PM UTC, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 at 15:10, Santiago Ruano RincĂłn
> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Debian Fellows,
>>
>> Following the email sent by Ilu to debian-project (Message-ID:
>> <4b93ed08-f148-4c7f-b172-f967f7de7...@gmx.net>), and as we have
>> discussed
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 Ă©crit :
>> 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
On June 19, 2022 7:03:00 PM UTC, Micha Lenk wrote:
>Hi Antoine,
>
>Am 19.06.22 um 19:31 schrieb Antoine Beaupré:
>> I second this GR.
>> I understand people might not *agree* with it, but I still think it's
>> worth discussing it more, especially in the open.
>
>For discussing things, whether i
On June 19, 2022 2:40:01 AM UTC, "Louis-Philippe VĂ©ronneau"
wrote:
>Someone pointed out "assets" is very broad, and that would include
>things like hardware donations (something I don't think would be wise).
>
>I would hereby like to amend my proposal by replacing "assets" by
>"financial asset
On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 6:22:00 PM EST Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Judit" == Judit Foglszinger writes:
> Judit> Give the opportunity to vote for secret voting without
> Judit> needing to additionally vote for unrelated/only slightly
> Judit> related constitution changes; for ex
Seconded/sponsored.
Scott K
On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 5:44:34 PM EST Judit Foglszinger wrote:
> I propose a ballot option for the GR
> "Hide Identities of Developers Casting a Particular Vote"
> that makes the following changes to the constitution.
>
> 1) Do not make the identity of a vote
On November 3, 2021 9:27:08 PM UTC, Felix Lechner
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I would like to rename the FTP Masters team—ideally via a General Resolution.
>
>Since the murder of George Floyd, the average fate of Black lives has
>received much attention. Even the tech sector picked up the
>"master/slave" t
On Tuesday, June 2, 2020 12:12:21 AM EDT Bdale Garbee wrote:
> 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
On Monday, June 1, 2020 6:12:30 PM EDT Ivo De Decker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 5/22/20 2:43 PM, Holger Levsen 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 Developers Co
On Friday, May 22, 2020 12:43:56 PM EDT Sam Hartman wrote:
> [I hope someone on the DebConf team side is willing to summarize the
> results of this discussion to debian-vote]
>
> > "Stefano" == Stefano Rivera writes:
> Stefano> Hi Sam (2020.05.22_14:51:42_+)
>
> >> The interestin
On Friday, March 27, 2020 9:37:28 AM EDT Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 27/03/20 at 09:23 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Friday, March 27, 2020 8:40:11 AM EDT Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > On 27/03/20 at 12:23 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > > > At least during m
On Friday, March 27, 2020 8:40:11 AM EDT Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 27/03/20 at 12:23 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > At least during my many years of Ubuntu archive administration I've
> > actually seen quite a lot of packages which contained non-distributable
> > files, had hilariously broken maint
On Wednesday, March 18, 2020 6:41:42 PM EDT Brian Gupta wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 4:30 PM Neil McGovern wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 12:57:55AM +0800, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > > * Louis-Philippe VĂ©ronneau [2020-03-18 12:52]:
> > > > Would you care to elaborate on what "the Yorba d
On Wednesday, March 18, 2020 9:28:21 AM EDT Jonathan Carter wrote:
> Hi Raphaël
>
> On 2020/03/18 12:00, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > I would like all the candidates to reply to this question on discourse:
> > https://discourse.debian.net/t/dear-dpl-candidates-what-are-your-thoughts->
> > > on-disc
On December 12, 2019 2:57:55 PM UTC, Ian Jackson
wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: Some thoughts about Diversity and the
>CoC"):
>> I think you reinforce my original point. In this case, the 'other
>> side' isn't the proposer of the option, it&#x
On December 12, 2019 3:01:26 PM UTC, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Kitterman writes:
>
>
>Scott> I think you reinforce my original point. In this case, the
>Scott> 'other side' isn't the proposer of the op
On December 12, 2019 12:23:21 PM UTC, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Kitterman writes:
>
> Scott> TLDR: Words have meanings and I find it deeply offensive when
>Scott> one group tries to hijack them for their own ends. This
, Sam Hartman wrote:
>TL;DR: Treating people with respect is hard and very contextual.
>Choosing to change how you talk about something to make people more
>comfortable doesn't always mean you were obligated to make that change.
>Sometimes you're just promoting connection
On Friday, December 6, 2019 3:59:43 PM EST Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 09:04:39PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Ok, so here's what I'd like (or would have liked) to get into the ballot,
> > given the new context after the addition of the combined D+G option. But
> >
On Friday, December 6, 2019 3:51:50 PM EST Guillem Jover wrote:
> [ Sorry, resending signed this time around. :/ ]
>
> Hi!
>
> Ok, so here's what I'd like (or would have liked) to get into the ballot,
> given the new context after the addition of the combined D+G option. But
> it's not very clear
On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 12:13:03 PM EST Sam Hartman wrote:
> I note that our voting system does have recourse for people who believe
> that the vote is called to early.
>
> They can vote FD above other options.
> And in this specific case, voting G>FD> other options
> would send a clear messa
On November 27, 2019 2:54:04 PM UTC, Simon McVittie wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 11:27:13 +, Chris Lamb wrote:
>> May I gently request we replace the use of the word "diversity"
>> throughout the "init systems and systemd" General Resolution prior to
>> it being subject to a plebiscite?
>
On November 16, 2019 10:50:59 PM UTC, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 05:40:10PM +, Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
>>
>> [2019-11-15 11:52] Ian Jackson
>> > Dmitry, I suggest instead, this change to your original text:
>>
>> Being able to run Debian systems with init systems othe
On November 15, 2019 3:26:31 AM UTC, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes:
>
>> This option makes multiple references to RC and non-RC bugs based on
>> actions of the policy editors.
>
>> It's my understanding that determining if a bug is RC or not is
On November 14, 2019 8:08:28 PM UTC, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
>
>I'd like to propose the following resolution.
>
>Seconds are not required, but it would be valuable to get confirmation
>that the three choices contained in this proposal are worth having on
>the ballot.
>So, rather than seconding the
On March 29, 2017 8:16:40 PM EDT, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
>Hi Scott,
>
>On 29/03/2017 13:34, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 11:25:29 AM Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
>> ...
>>> I believe the Roadmap will help us for the first subject and the
>partners
On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 11:25:29 AM Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
...
> I believe the Roadmap will help us for the first subject and the partners
> program, once in place, will bring new (useful) workflows on the
> organization side.
...
IIRC, last year your campaign included this idea of roadmaps. Do
On Thursday, January 12, 2017 02:26:59 PM Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 03:11:46AM +0000, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > Here's an example of possible unintended consequences:
> >
> > Currently we enumerate no specifics about exceptions to
On January 11, 2017 4:47:30 PM EST, Sean Whitton
wrote:
>Hello Scott,
>
>On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 07:04:02PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> Yes, but all your proposed GR does is move the problem one definition
>> to the right.
>
>I don't follow this objection.
That's good for Debian.
>
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 11:51:37PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > What is the definition of serious and what is the definition of
> > limited?
>
> Intentionally not specified, so that it's left up to the judgement of
> those
On Monday, January 09, 2017 09:00:58 PM Russ Allbery wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:08:19 PM Sean Whitton wrote:
> >> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
> >>
> >> Title: State exception for security bugs in Social Contract clause 3
>
On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:08:19 PM Sean Whitton wrote:
> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
>
> Title: State exception for security bugs in Social Contract clause 3
>
> 1. Debian has a longstanding practice of sharing information about
>serious security bugs with only the security team. This is so t
On Monday, November 30, 2015 03:13:07 PM Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Kurt" == Kurt Roeckx writes:
> Kurt> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 03:44:02PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 01:58:56AM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >> > It seems devotee is currently not working prop
On Friday, October 30, 2015 08:00:30 PM Philip Hands wrote:
> Sam Hartman writes:
> >- GENERAL RESOLUTION STARTS -
> >
> >
> >Constitutional Amendment: TC Supermajority Fix
> >
> >Prior to the Clone Proof SSD GR in June 2003, the Technical
> >Committee could ove
Yes. that's the one I recalled that I liked. Seconded.
Scott K
On Wednesday, September 09, 2015 01:08:39 AM Sam Hartman wrote:
> See https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2015/09/msg00016.html
> for the message to second if you choose to do that.
> Rationale copied below.
>
>
> As I discussed
For those of us that lost track, would you please restate your option? I seem
to remember liking it.
Scott K
On September 8, 2015 7:58:33 PM EDT, Sam Hartman wrote:
>Hi. It's not clear that my amendment with a minimal change has quite
>enough support to be on the ballot.
>
>
>would people be
On Tuesday, December 02, 2014 10:50:30 PM Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 6:42 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > 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 s
On Monday, December 01, 2014 09:12:47 PM Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 11:50:27AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > We discussed, and I thought there was consensus around, the idea that
> > due to the recent ctte churn, the transitional measure was no lo
On Monday, December 01, 2014 12:28:58 PM Hubert Chathi wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Dec 2014 11:50:27 -0500, Scott Kitterman
said:
> >> -
> >> --
> >>
> >> As a transitional measure, if this GR
On Monday, December 01, 2014 04:59:53 PM Colin Tuckley wrote:
> On 01/12/14 16:50, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > As an amendment, I propose the transitional measure be removed.
>
> Why not support the amendment from Lucas instead which has more or less
> the same effect?
It ha
On Monday, December 01, 2014 12:20:25 PM Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> [ Cross post -vote, -project ; M-F-T: to -vote.
>
> For more background information on the development of this proposal,
> see https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2014/11/msg00274.html ]
>
> I'm hereby formally submitting t
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:33:28 PM Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Lucas" == Lucas Nussbaum writes:
> Lucas> (Elaborating on the context a bit given the discussion spread
> Lucas> over some time -- two options have been proposed: - expire
> Lucas> the 2 most senior members - expire
83 matches
Mail list logo
