On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 06:32:48AM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 01:03:43AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I'm disappointed at the amount of nonsense being posted in this thread
> > along the following lines:
> >
> > But this is no excuse for arguing the legal technicali
On Sat, Jun 05, 2004 at 06:32:11AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Graham Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040605 06:25]:
> > By dropping proposal F from the ballot, we are dropping the only
> > proposal that does not support releasing Sarge as is. We will not drop a
> > proposal simply because you disa
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 06:32:11 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Graham Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040605 06:25]:
>> On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 11:01:18AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> > I think that you also mean me with your mail. Perhaps you're
>> > right, and it may be the best t
* Graham Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040605 06:25]:
> On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 11:01:18AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > I think that you also mean me with your mail. Perhaps you're right,
> > and it may be the best to drop both proposals F and G from the ballot.
> > I wouldn't stand in the way of
On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 11:01:18AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> I think that you also mean me with your mail. Perhaps you're right,
> and it may be the best to drop both proposals F and G from the ballot.
> I wouldn't stand in the way of dropping both proposals together from
> the ballot, and vote
Andrew M.A. Cater writes ("Re: _Our_ resolution merely affirms the status quo"):
> I posted a comment a long time ago, which might bear repeating
> (something close to the text below IIRC).
>
> The Debian developers changed their policy and fundamental documents
> when
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 01:03:43AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I'm disappointed at the amount of nonsense being posted in this thread
> along the following lines:
>
> But this is no excuse for arguing the legal technicalities (`what does
> the Social Contract mean') as opposed to the moral/practic
* Ian Jackson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040602 07:10]:
> I'm disappointed at the amount of nonsense being posted in this thread
> along the following lines:
> [...]
> Now of course I have an opinion about what the Social Contract says
> and I think people who disagree either have poor reading comprehens
8 matches
Mail list logo