On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 10:27:58AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> and the only way to do
> this is to use this cited release policy.
I dispute this opinion, and I doubt I'm the only one. For that matter
I dispute the opinion that our users would be best served by releasing
whatever we have on hand.
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 10:50:27 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> "promise to do regular releases" does not speak about "making our
> release intervals shorter". Of course, the goal is to do a release
> about once a year, but that's not part of the promise.
Fair enough.
>> Ma
* Andreas Barth:
> Actually, we hide security bugs. Of course not, if they are filled
> into the bts, but we hide them if they are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Please don't misunderstand me; I think the current approach is the
> right one, but with literal reading SC #3 is tangled (and I know that
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040603 06:10]:
> On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 03:09:16 +0200, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > * Manoj Srivastava:
> >>> For our users, we promise to do regular releases; as a guideline,
> >>> a major release of the distribution should happen about once a
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040602 19:55]:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 10:27:58 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > * Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040602 09:25]:
> >> On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:19:15 +0200, Andreas Barth
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >> Reaffir
On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 22:54:27 -0500, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> There are two issues here: does the old policy violate the social
>> contract,
> Yes, I do not think there is much of dispute on that regards
> (well, there is none, in my mind).
> I would like to poi
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 12:24:56 +1000, Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 03:09:16AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Manoj Srivastava:
>> >> For our users, we promise to do regular releases; as a
>> >> guideline, a major release of the distribution should happen
>> >>
On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 03:09:16 +0200, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Manoj Srivastava:
>>> For our users, we promise to do regular releases; as a guideline,
>>> a major release of the distribution should happen about once a
>>> year.
>>
>> On what basis do you think we can make this p
On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 03:09:16AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Manoj Srivastava:
> >> For our users, we promise to do regular releases; as a guideline, a
> >> major release of the distribution should happen about once a year.
> > On what basis do you think we can make this promise?
Why ar
* Manoj Srivastava:
>> For our users, we promise to do regular releases; as a guideline, a
>> major release of the distribution should happen about once a year.
>
> On what basis do you think we can make this promise?
On the same basis that we promise not to hide bugs? Or not to rely on
no
On Wed, 02 Jun 2004, Frank Küster wrote:
> Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you think the contents of the link should be cited, instead of
> giving only the URL, or what are you missing?
So state that the RM is directed to use the following requirements for
determining which packages
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 10:27:58 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040602 09:25]:
>> On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:19:15 +0200, Andreas Barth
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> Reaffirmation of the social contract - priorities
>> > are our users and
* Raul Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040602 12:40]:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 10:27:58AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > However, as the 3:1-majority is needed anyways(*), I don't mind to add
> > something like:
> > In the opinion of the Secretary, this proposal overrules the social
> > contract, and
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 10:27:58AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> However, as the 3:1-majority is needed anyways(*), I don't mind to add
> something like:
> In the opinion of the Secretary, this proposal overrules the social
> contract, and needs therefor a 3:1-majority. In the opinion of the
> prop
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > That's a nice thing to say, but in the short term, what exactly does
>> > this mean for the various clases of controversial works under
>> > discussion here?
>>
>> See the last part of the proposal.
>
> The last part of the proposal only indicates tha
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040602 09:25]:
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:19:15 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Reaffirmation of the social contract - priorities
> > are our users and the free software community
>
> > For our users, we promise to do regular releases
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:19:15 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Reaffirmation of the social contract - priorities
> are our users and the free software community
> We, Debian, reaffirm that our priorities are our users and the free
> software community. We keep to that, both a
On Tue, 01 Jun 2004, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Don Armstrong ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040601 11:40]:
> > On Tue, 01 Jun 2004, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > We, Debian, reaffirm that our priorities are our users and the free
> > > software community. We keep to that, both are our priorities. We
> > > don't
* John H. Robinson, IV ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040601 20:55]:
> To: to debian-devel removed
>
> Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040505 14:10]:
> > > ---
> > > The Debian project resolves that it will not compromise on freedom,
> > > and will never knowingly issue anoth
To: to debian-devel removed
Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040505 14:10]:
> > ---
> > The Debian project resolves that it will not compromise on freedom,
> > and will never knowingly issue another release (excluding point
> > updates to stable releases) that contains
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
> resolution:
>
> --
> Reaffirmation of the social contract - priorities are our users and
> the free software community
>
> We, Debian, reaffirm th
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:31:21AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Objection. Common sense is what tells you that the world is flat.
Common sense tells me that if the world was flat the horizon would always
be obscured.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "We vote for more money"
And a pony!
--
Sam "Eddie" Couter | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian Developer| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89
On Jun 01, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
> resolution:
Seconded.
--
ciao, |
Marco | [6555 tr7cnnrfx4XGs]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040601 11:25]:
> On 2004-06-01 09:19:15 +0100 Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
> >resolution:
> Don't you need to sign it?
According to my mail program, it was signed.
> >We know that,
* Don Armstrong ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040601 11:40]:
> On Tue, 01 Jun 2004, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > We, Debian, reaffirm that our priorities are our users and the free
> > software community. We keep to that, both are our priorities. We
> > don't intend to give one of them up for the other. We stro
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:15:47AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> >course, the Release Manager team is authorized to adjust the release
> >policy.
> So, if this option passes, the RM could just revert it to the
> overruled one immediately?
I think I can safely speak for everyone involved in release and a
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> For our users, we promise to do regular releases; as a guideline, a
> major release of the distribution should happen about once a year.
"We vote for more money"
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> We know that, as with every guidelines, there are border cases were
> these guidelines don't really match. We promise to use our common
> sense in this case to get to an appropriate result. We will use our
> guidelines in a way that s
On Tue, 01 Jun 2004, Andreas Barth wrote:
> We, Debian, reaffirm that our priorities are our users and the free
> software community. We keep to that, both are our priorities. We
> don't intend to give one of them up for the other. We strongly
> believe that, in the long run, their interests are th
On 2004-06-01 09:19:15 +0100 Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
resolution:
Don't you need to sign it?
We know that, as with every guidelines, there are border cases were
where not were.
re-inforce the release policy that was
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
> resolution:
>
> --
> Reaffirmation of the social contract - priorities are our users and
> the free software community
>
> We, Debian, reaffirm th
> I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
> resolution:
>
> --
> Reaffirmation of the social contract - priorities are our users and
> the free software community
...
> community, and we don't intend to blow our guidelines up to full legal
> texts, becau
33 matches
Mail list logo
