On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 07:54:54PM -0400, Walter Landry wrote:
> Because there is some confusion over what the actual effects of the
> various options in GR 2004_003 are, I have undertaken an analysis.
Walter, your analysis is useful but does not seem to be neutral;
> Choice 1 (Postpone until Sep
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 07:54:54PM -0400, Walter Landry wrote:
> [1] He made another mistake in DFSG release policy in
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/debian-legal-200304/msg00451.html
> but then corrected himself soon after. We're all human.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-l
On 2004-05-22 02:38:20 +0100 Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
actually, he didn't. he was perfectly correct that "software" did
not include
documentation, fonts, device firmware or other *DATA*.
Not at all. The inclusive one is the original and proper meaning, as
far as I can tell. It
On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 07:54:54PM -0400, Walter Landry wrote:
> and Choice 4 (revert to old wording), will have no effect on release policy.
> The Release Manager erroneously concluded that nonfree material could be
> included in a release [1].
actually, he didn't. he was perfectly correct tha
Greetings,
Because there is some confusion over what the actual effects of the
various options in GR 2004_003 are, I have undertaken an analysis.
Choice 1 (Postpone until Sept 1), Choice 2 (Postpone until after
Sarge), and Choice 4 (revert to old wording), will have no effect on
release policy.
On Mon, 17 May 2004 09:56:52 +0200, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:32:50PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> It is belabouring the obvious. How can anyone think that 40
>> characters is the full text of the proposal?
>>
>> And are there really debian develope
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 03:02:10PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> I think we got into this "mess" because of a sudden and unanticipated
> bout of morality on the part of the release manager.
Andrew, go fuck yourself.
If you want to say that I've been acting immorally up until last month,
have t
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:42:07PM -0400, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> > >> Why do developers have to be told this?
>
> In theory, they don't. In theory, the options on the ballot are
> self-explanatory, and developers should know where to find more
> information. However, in practice, it is clear that
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:32:50PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> It is belabouring the obvious. How can anyone think that 40
> characters is the full text of the proposal?
>
> And are there really debian developers who do not understand
> this?
Yeah, let's just try it out. Thre
On Mon, 17 May 2004 00:02:26 -0400, Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:38:32PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 May 2004 22:42:07 -0400, Duncan Findlay
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> If there are people who find this less clear:
>> =
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:38:32PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 16 May 2004 22:42:07 -0400, Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > There is harm in reminding developers how to inform themselves
> > before voting??? You claim to want an "informed electorate" yet you
> > object to
Hi folks,
I think, (in a cooler vien), that one can't please
everyone. I have looked at the issues raised, and it is my considered
opinion that combined with the fact that the ballot only contains 40
char titles for each proposal, and has the following lines:
===
On Sun, 16 May 2004 22:42:07 -0400, Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 06:03:34PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 May 2004 22:09:01 +0200, Wouter Verhelst
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:27:49AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava w
On Sun, 16 May 2004 19:59:48 -0500, Graham Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 06:03:34PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 May 2004 22:09:01 +0200, Wouter Verhelst
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:27:49AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 06:03:34PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 16 May 2004 22:09:01 +0200, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:27:49AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> On 15 May 2004 21:11:02 +0100, Henning Makholm
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sa
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 06:03:34PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 16 May 2004 22:09:01 +0200, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:27:49AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> On 15 May 2004 21:11:02 +0100, Henning Makholm
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
On Sun, 16 May 2004 22:09:01 +0200, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:27:49AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On 15 May 2004 21:11:02 +0100, Henning Makholm
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> >The full texts of the proposals being voted on can be found on
>
On Sun, 16 May 2004 13:22:20 -0500, Graham Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:27:49AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On 15 May 2004 21:11:02 +0100, Henning Makholm
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > Scripsit Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> The details of th
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:27:49AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 15 May 2004 21:11:02 +0100, Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >The full texts of the proposals being voted on can be found on
> > http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_004
>
> >They have been been omitte
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:27:49AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 15 May 2004 21:11:02 +0100, Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Scripsit Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> The details of the general resolution can be found at:
> >> http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_004
>
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:25:34AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sat, 15 May 2004 01:27:13 +0200, Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > Is there any reason why choices are indexed as 1,2,3,... while the
> > proposal themselves are always indexed as A,B,C,... on
> > vote.debian.org.
>
On 15 May 2004 21:11:02 +0100, Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Scripsit Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> The details of the general resolution can be found at:
>> http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_004
> I think this reference is too weak. The link should jump out and
> bite
On Sat, 15 May 2004 01:27:13 +0200, Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Is there any reason why choices are indexed as 1,2,3,... while the
> proposal themselves are always indexed as A,B,C,... on
> vote.debian.org.
> Just curious and somewhat confused.
Apart from the fact that devote
Scripsit Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The details of the general resolution can be found at:
> http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_004
I think this reference is too weak. The link should jump out and bite
any hypothetical reader who has been vacationing on a desert island
for the last
Scripsit Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Is there any reason why choices are indexed as 1,2,3,... while the
> proposal themselves are always indexed as A,B,C,... on vote.debian.org.
It turned out that the vote-tallying software has a hard-coded
assumption that the options are identified by numbe
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 02:40:33PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> [ ] Choice 1: Postpone changes until September 2004 [needs 3:1]
> [ ] Choice 2: Postpone changes until Sarge releases [needs 3:1]
> [ ] Choice 3: Add
Hi,
This is a draft.
manoj
Voting starts on
Votes must be received by
The following ballot is for voting on a General Resolution to address
the effect of the previous general resolution, titled "Editorial
changes to the Social Contract", on the release sche
27 matches
Mail list logo
