Seconded.
On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 05:56:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
>
> Title: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest
>
> 1. The 2005 General Resolution titled "Declassification of debian-private
>list archives" is repealed.
>
> 2. Debian listmas
* Don Armstrong , 2016-07-17, 17:56:
=== BEGIN GR TEXT ===
Title: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest
1. The 2005 General Resolution titled "Declassification of
debian-private list archives" is repealed.
2. Debian listmasters and/or other individuals delegated by the DPL t
On Sun, 2016-07-17 17:56:12 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
>
> Title: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest
>
> 1. The 2005 General Resolution titled "Declassification of debian-private
>list archives" is repealed.
>
> 2. Debian listmasters and/or other
On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 05:56:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
>
> Title: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest
>
> 1. The 2005 General Resolution titled "Declassification of debian-private
>list archives" is repealed.
>
> 2. Debian listmasters and/or
This seems a shame to me. It's a promotion of pragmatism over idealism,
suggesting that despite the project believing that a course of action is
the right one, it won't happen, pre-supposing any future interest or
effort will not exist, which is quite pessimistic (however realistic);
essentially cl
On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 05:56:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
>
> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
>
> Title: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest
>
> 1. The 2005 General Resolution titled "Declassification of debian-private
>list archives" is repealed.
>
> 2. Debian listmasters and
also sprach Don Armstrong [2016-07-18 02:56 +0200]:
> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
>
> Title: Declassifying parts of -private of historical interest
>
> 1. The 2005 General Resolution titled "Declassification of debian-private
>list archives" is repealed.
>
> 2. Debian listmasters and/or other ind
Don Armstrong writes ("Amendment to Proposed GR: Declassifying parts of
-private of historical interest"):
> In response to the helpful comments, I've modified my proposed amendment
> to Nicolas's resolution by adding "at minimum", and now propose the
> following amendment:
>
> === BEGIN GR TEXT
Jonathan Dowland writes ("Re: Proposed GR: Acknowledge that the debian-private
list will remain private"):
> This seems a shame to me. It's a promotion of pragmatism over idealism,
> suggesting that despite the project believing that a course of action is
> the right one, it won't happen, pre-supp
tl;dr:
pls can we create debian-members@l.d.o with posting acceptance rules
copied from debian-devel-announce[1] and subscriber list maintained in
sync with debian-private.
(Reply-to set to -project.)
We've been having a good conversation on -vote about the
declassification of -private. W
Although this part of the text originates from the original GR text and
not Don's amendment, my comment applies as much to the amended text so
I'm threading it here:
On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 05:56:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> 3. In keeping with paragraph 3 of the Debian Social Contract, Debia
Hi Ian,
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 01:17:20PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Thanks for your message.
You're welcome, thanks.
> Don's proposed resolution clearly does not close the door. It makes
> it possible for someone who is interested in declassification to try
> to develop a workable process,
Jonathan Dowland writes ("Re: Amendment to Proposed GR: Declassifying parts of
-private of historical interest"):
> Although this part of the text originates from the original GR text and
> not Don's amendment, my comment applies as much to the amended text so
> I'm threading it here:
>
> On Sun,
Jonathan Dowland writes ("Re: Proposed GR: Acknowledge that the debian-private
list will remain private"):
> However, this approach for me is less acceptable if there is a diminished
> chance of such "flame-retardant" discussions from ever being declassified,
> which I think would be the case afte
On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 05:56:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> In response to the helpful comments, I've modified my proposed amendment
> to Nicolas's resolution by adding "at minimum", and now propose the
> following amendment:
>
> === BEGIN GR TEXT ===
>
> Title: Declassifying parts of -priva
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 05:56:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > In response to the helpful comments, I've modified my proposed amendment
> > to Nicolas's resolution by adding "at minimum", and now propose the
> > following amendment:
[...]
> So this am
16 matches
Mail list logo
