On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 01:27:38PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 12:17:58AM +0530, Sruthi Chandran wrote:
> > > belately conveyed [0] to FSF’s staff and supporters.
>
> I've changed that to "belatedly".
The option has been committed, it should be on the website soon.
Kurt
On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 01:56:08PM +0100, Timo Weingärtner wrote:
> Hallo Kurt Roeckx,
>
> 27.03.21 13:03 Kurt Roeckx:
> > I've added this option on the website. I'm still processing emails.
> >
> > Note that it's my interpretation that if changes are a
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 12:40:56PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le 27 mars 2021 13:55:23 GMT+01:00, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> >On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 01:27:38PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >> On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 12:17:58AM +0530, Sruthi Chandran wrote:
> >> &
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 05:42:23PM +0300, Apollon Oikonomopoulos wrote:
>
> Seconded, thank you Santiago!
Your message was not signed.
Kurt
This option is now also on the website.
This option is now also on the website.
Kurt
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:28:16AM +0200, Christian Kastner wrote:
> On 01.04.21 10:11, Santiago R.R. wrote:
> > What happens if Kurt also wants to take part in the discussion? Should
> > we decide on who will review the messages and announce the winner of
> > that discussion?
>
> I was worried ab
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:40:59PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:42:01PM +, Jean Duprat (Avignon) wrote:
> > Votes in leadership elections are kept secret even after the end of
> > the voting period for obvious reasons: by knowing that the ballot is
> > secret, v
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 09:47:51AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
>
> > This is probably something that should be fixed in the Constitution, by
> > mandating secret voting for elections whereas living to the judgment of
> > the secretary whether other GR votes should be s
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:18:08AM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 9:59 AM Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >
> > I could move to voting software like Belenios
>
> Moving to new software without preparation or a chance to practice
> could discour
The option is now on the website.
Kurt
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 12:08:52PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> Short and simple:
>
> TEXT OF OPTION 5
>
>
> Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt against Richard
> Stallman, the Free Software Foundation, and the members of the board of the
> Free Softwar
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 09:11:29PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Phil Morrell writes:
>
> > Do the additional proposals made in that week mean the discussion period
> > has automatically been extended? Is the Secretary simply being pragmatic
> > here, executing discretion before announcing the sta
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 01:06:49AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx dijo [Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 08:56:33AM +0200]:
> > There is also this in 4.2:
> > 4. The minimum discussion period is 2 weeks, but may be varied by up
> >to 1 week by the Project Leader. The
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 07:15:32PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le vendredi 02 avril 2021 à 08:56:33+0200, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 09:11:29PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > Phil Morrell writes:
> > >
> > > > Do the addi
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 07:30:58PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Ah I see!
>
> Thanks for this.
>
> I think your interpretation is the most relevant one for now but indeed
> there is some place here for improvements.
>
> I intend to propose a Constitution change taking into account the se
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 09:53:30AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx dijo [Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 09:29:06AM +0200]:
> > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 01:06:49AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > > Dear Debian Project Secretary,
> > >
> > > Given the DPL authorize
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 10:56:45AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> Short and simple:
>
> TEXT OF OPTION 5
>
>
> Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt against Richard
> Stallman, the Free Software Foundation, and the members of the board of the
> Free Softwar
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 10:38:23PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 09:33:48AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 10:56:45AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > Short and simple:
> > >
> > > TEXT OF OPTION 5
> > > -
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 10:59:53PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 01:56:32PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > A vote has been called.
>
> Nope, can't have been.
>
> The last amendment (before mine) was accepted on March 30th, which means the
>
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 05:48:47AM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 12:34 AM Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >
> > The discussion period is over, no new options will be added.
>
> That does not seem right. The submission arrived during the discu
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 03:53:58PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 06:20:47PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> >
> > TEXT OF OPTION 5
> >
> >
> > Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt against
> > Richard
> > Stallman, the Free Software Fo
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 10:56:45AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> Short and simple:
>
> TEXT OF OPTION 5
>
>
> Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt against Richard
> Stallman, the Free Software Foundation, and the members of the board of the
> Free Softwar
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 06:21:54PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 10:56:45AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > TEXT OF OPTION 5
> >
> >
> > Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt against
> > Richard
> > Stallman, the Free Software Found
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:07:54PM +0200, Micha Lenk wrote:
> Am 03.04.21 um 01:56 schrieb Craig Sanders:
> > Short and simple:
> >
> > TEXT OF OPTION 5
> >
> >
> > Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt
> > against Richard Stallman, the Free Software
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:15:22PM +0200, Micha Lenk wrote:
> My previous attempt yielded an invalid signature for me, so, trying again with
> a different mailer...
This one worked.
Kurt
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 08:12:50PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 10:56:45AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > Short and simple:
> >
> > TEXT OF OPTION 5
> >
> >
> > Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt against
> Richard
> > Stallman, t
The option has been committed to the website, it should appear
soon.
Here is a draft ballot for the DPL election:
Voting period starts 2021-04-04 00:00:00 UTC
Votes must be received by 2021-04-17 23:59:59 UTC
This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.
You may see the constitution at https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution
Here is the draft ballot:
Voting period starts 2021-04-04 00:00:00 UTC
Votes must be received by 2021-04-17 23:59:59 UTC
The following ballot is for voting on a regarding Richard Stallman's
readmission to the FSF board
This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constit
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 09:14:31AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 05:43:38PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > Move choice 7 to 8 and put it seven.
> >
> > [ ] Choice 7: Rejecting and denouncing a witch-hunt against RMS.
> >
> > (maybe Craig has a better idea)
>
> Thank
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 09:31:46AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution#item-A, there is the
> following sentence under A.6. bullet 3.2.:
>
> > An option A defeats the default option D by a majority ratio N, if V(A,D)
> > is greater or equal to N *
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 06:09:53PM +0200, Milan Zamazal wrote:
> > "MK" == Matthias Klumpp writes:
>
> MK> I did actually read this as satire and was quite amused by it
>
> I’m not amused by it. I liked the 1st April joke, but this is not fun
> anymore and the fact that someone as respe
On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 10:20:15PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 09:49:01PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 11:29:58PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > > I'd rather have a None of the Above default option all the time along
> > > with FD. It'd
On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 09:45:15AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
>
> Let's say a cohort of voters prefers option APRICOT to option BANANA,
> but would like neither (FD) even better. However they are well aware
> that there's no way FD will win.
>
> It is possible that if they vote their true
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 01:12:26PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> On another list, there was discussion of the DPL encouraging the
> secretary to make the vote on the rms GR secret.
If we're going to go this way, I would really like to make this
change soon. Based on the outcome of this, people mi
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 10:59:16AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> * A secret ballot, while contrary to the constitution for GRs, is not
> wholly irregular for the project. We use one every year for the DPL
> election and the tradeoffs are well-understood. This vote poses an
> additional ch
On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 09:29:21AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> I agree for the GR vote to be secret. I understand others came to a
> different conclusion. I trust Kurt for making the right decision. I
> will not complain about it.
As secretary, I do not intend to make the vote secret.
Person
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 08:59:24AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> This is not GMAIL problem. This involves only My PC and Debian
> servers.
>
> (I use gmail only for recieving mails. I send mail from my Debian
> shell account using SSH when I use @debuian.org address to avoid mail
> r
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 05:53:39PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> I noticed no No Last call for votes has been sent for either vote so far,
> which is usually sent around 48 hours before the end of a vote.
>
> Looking at graphs for past votes (e.g. [1] where one can easily see when
> the second and
On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 06:58:49PM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> I hope it is on-topic here to note that options 1, 3, and 4 formed a
> Condorcet preference cycle. So these *do* occur in the wild! And not
> for low-ranked obscure options either.
>
> The winning option 7 has an arrow with a
On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 07:17:18PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 06:58:49PM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> > If the winning option in an election is part of a preference cycle,
> > then it (by definition) has the property that there exists some other
> > option that a
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 05:32:40PM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> Sam Hartman writes:
> > For me though, even there, notice that we'd be choosing between options
> > that the voters considered acceptable.
> > Because of that, I am not bothered by the cycle.
>
> If the decision doesn't really
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 07:20:48PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>
> I did not want to spend time on figuring out if voting --- in
> our voting system is the same as not voting at all
Ranking all options the same has no effect on the result. It does
not have an effect on the quorum or majority.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 06:51:05PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Below is an initial proposal for a revision to the GR and Technical
> Committee processes, offered to start a project discussion.
You've made various changes to your draft since. Can you send an
updated draft?
K
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 12:09:54AM +0100, Mathias Behrle wrote:
>
> Seconded.
Your message isn't signed.
Kurt
On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 10:04:07AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I propose the following General Resolution, which will require a 3:1
> majority, and am seeking sponsors.
This is now at:
https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_003
I did not add any of the corrections, you did not sign them, you
indi
On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 08:19:26AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Timo Röhling writes:
>
> > I was under the impression that this amendment by the original
> > proposer does not require re-sponsoring, and my consent is
> > implicitly assumed unless I choose to object. Am I wrong?
>
> > (If I am, c
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 07:25:45PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Here is an updated version of my proposal, which incorporates the formal
> amendment to change the default option for TC resolutions to also be "None
> of the above" and fixes two typos.
I've updated the website and changed the start
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 09:31:42AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst writes:
>
> > aaand this should've been signed. Good morning.
>
> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 09:50:14AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> >> All this changes my proposal to the below. I would appreciate if my
>
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 07:25:45PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Section 6.3
> ---
>
> Replace 6.3.1 in its entirety with:
>
> 1. Resolution process.
>
>The Technical Committee uses the following process to prepare a
>resolution for vote:
>
>1. Any member of t
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 09:53:50AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Text of the GR
> > ==
> >
> > The Debian Developers, by way of General Resolution, amend the Debian
> > constitution under point 4.1.2 as follows. This General Resolution
> > requires a 3:1 majority.
> >
> > Sections
On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 03:50:22PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 06:52:59PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 09:31:42AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > Wouter Verhelst writes:
> > >
> > > > aaand t
On Sat, Jan 08, 2022 at 08:20:18PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> As previously discussed, and given that there has been no further
> discussion, I am calling for a vote on the general resolution on the
> Debian resolution process, using the ballot currently on the web site at
> htt
On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 11:23:35PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> As of this writing, the tally sheet is still the dummy tally sheet, and it
> has not been replaced with the real one.
I don't see a problem. This looks like the real tally sheet:
https://www.debian.org/vote/2021/vote_003_tally.txt
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 10:31:54AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 11:41:51PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 11:23:35PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > As of this writing, the tally sheet is still the dummy tally sheet, and
>
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 08:06:20AM -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> 2) In the General resolution system, in addition to the constitutional
> amendment, include a statement of the day asking the secretary to obtain
> sufficient project consensus before changing how voting works.
I plan to look at lea
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:44:10PM -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Pierre-Elliott" == Pierre-Elliott Bécue writes:
>
> Pierre-Elliott> I sponsor the resolution quoted below.
>
> I haven't gone and checked signatures, but unless someone's signature is
> bad or something, I think that gives
I'm proposing the following vote timeline:
Nomination period: Saturday 2022-03-05 - Friday 2022-03-11
Campaigning period: Saturday 2022-03-12 - Friday 2022-04-01
Voting period: Saturday 2022-04-02 - Friday 2022-04-15
The new term will start on 2022-04-21
Kurt
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 01:54:36PM -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> I also believe this advances the end of the discussion period to next
> Thursday (although other actions may advance the end of the discussion
> period further).
I've been reading our new constitution about the discussion period. Wh
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 01:12:23PM -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
> One easy way for you to do that would be to send a diff to the spacing.
> I could then update my branch and use the typo correction procedure in
> the constitution to get this fixed.
Or we can just leave it to the maintainer of the do
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 11:54:19AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx writes:
>
> > I've been reading our new constitution about the discussion period. What
> > I find is this in A.1.1:
> > The discussion period starts when a draft resolution is proposed a
Hi,
I've put up an initial page about the GR at:
https://www.debian.org/vote/2022/vote_001
I didn't have time yet to properly record all the seconds yet, but
believe the 3 option there all have the required amount of seconds,
and are the only options that reached that. The 3rd option reached
that
Hi,
A general resolution about voting secrecy has been started. Details about
it are available at: https://www.debian.org/vote/2022/vote_001
Kurt Roeckx
Debian Project Secretary
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sat, Mar 05, 2022 at 06:30:35PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> When considering a voting system, there are a few important things to
> consider [1]:
>
> 1- vote-privacy: the fact that a particular voter voted in a particular way
> is not revealed to anyone.
> 2- Receipt-freeness: a voter does n
On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 07:33:05PM +, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 11:26:28AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > "Barak A. Pearlmutter" writes:
> >
> > > In the discussion of the "voting secrecy" resolution, people seem to
> > > have assumed that it is impossible for a voting s
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 03:12:57PM -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Judit" == Judit Foglszinger writes:
>
> >> I think it would be clearer to add "that" between "confirm" and
> >> "their":
> >>
> >> {+ public, but developers will be given an option to confirm that
> >> thei
Here is the draft ballot:
Voting period starts 2022-03-13 00:00:00 UTC
Votes must be received by 2022-03-26 23:59:59 UTC
The following ballot is for voting on changing the resolution process.
This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.
You may see the cons
Updated ballot:
Voting period starts 2022-03-13 00:00:00 UTC
Votes must be received by 2022-03-26 23:59:59 UTC
The following ballot is for voting on changing the resolution process.
This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.
You may see the constitution a
An other update:
Voting period starts 2022-03-13 00:00:00 UTC
Votes must be received by 2022-03-26 23:59:59 UTC
The following ballot is for voting on changing the resolution process.
This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.
You may see the constitution
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 04:31:38PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx - Debian Project
Secretary wrote:
> We're now into the campaigning period. We have 3 candidates this
> year:
> - Felix Lechner
> - Jonathan Carter
> - Hideki Yamane
>
> I will make his platforms available when I have
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 12:22:09AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Apologies for this administrative question, but we have a couple of
> votes active at the moment, and so inquiring minds want to know.
>
> Due to an oversight, I managed to forget to update my GPG subkey's
> expiration date. I've si
On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 10:31:44AM -0700, felix.lech...@lease-up.com wrote:
> Dear Mr. Secretary,
>
> As a Second for the winning Option 2, I was personally happy with last
> night's vote, but I nonetheless object to your certification of these
> tentative results:
>
> > Option 2 defeats Option
On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 01:30:53PM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Hi Kurt,
>
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 11:03 AM Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >
> > Clearly people don't think it's identical, otherwise it would not have
> > been an option, or people would have voted
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:26:51PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "Kurt" == Kurt Roeckx writes:
>
>
> >> It inadvertently weakened the constitutional protection against
> >> changes to the constitution.
>
> Kurt> I cur
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 03:54:28PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> My understanding of the implications of this process (and Kurt is
> authoritative here, of course) is that if you rank NOTA equally with an
> option, that vote is not part of V(A,D) or V(D,A) since neither option is
> preferred over
Hi,
The voting period should have be open by now. It will be delayed by 1
day.
Kurt
Hi,
Here is the draft ballot.
Voting period starts 2022-04-03 00:00:00 UTC
Votes must be received by 2022-04-16 23:59:59 UTC
This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.
You may see the constitution at https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution.
For voting q
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 08:58:21PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> So, I propose the following:
>
> =
>
> We will include non-free firmware packages from the
> "non-free-firmware" section of the Debian archive on our official
> media (installer images and live image
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 07:36:17AM -0500, Devin Prater wrote:
> Seconded, thanks for mentioning the accessibility aspect!
> Devin Prater
> r.d.t.pra...@gmail.com
Your message was not signed, nor can I find you in the list of Debian
Developers. So I'm not registering this as a second. There are alr
On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 05:50:43PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> Seconded.
Your message was not signed.
Kurt
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 10:39:57AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> As far as I can tell, both Steve's and Gunnar's proposal would make
> Debian less of a free software operating system than it is today. That
> makes me sad. My preference for an outcome would be along the following
> lines.
The k
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 10:56:06AM -0400, Hubert Chathi wrote:
>
> s/Therefor/Therefore
I've adopted this change.
> > Thereby re-inforcing the interpretation that any installer or image
I've also changed that to reinforcing.
Let me know if that's not ok.
Kurt
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 07:06:01AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Jonas Smedegaard (2022-08-24 19:14:26)
> > Quoting Bart Martens (2022-08-24 10:12:48)
> > > =
> > >
> > > The Debian project is permitted to make distribution media (installer
> > > images
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:26:51AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hey Wouter!
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 12:19:55PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 08:58:21PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> system will *also* be configured to use the non-free-firmware
> >> component by
On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 03:56:25PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>
> That changes it from 5 to 4 seconds. It's unclear to me what I need to
> do with the discussion period because of this. If I process the message
> in order, I think this was accepted and A.1.4 changes the di
On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 07:26:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx writes:
>
> > That changes it from 5 to 4 seconds. It's unclear to me what I need to
> > do with the discussion period because of this. If I process the message
> > in order, I think this w
On Sun, Aug 28, 2022 at 10:52:42AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 07:26:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Kurt Roeckx writes:
> >
> > > That changes it from 5 to 4 seconds. It's unclear to me what I need to
> > > do with the discussio
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 09:36:37AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard writes:
>
> > I view the official Debian install image as a component of Debian, and
> > consequently if the (only) official Debian install image were to contain
> > non-free bits then we would violate DSC#1.
>
>
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 09:38:52PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hi Kurt!
>
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 04:26:40PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:26:51AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> Hey Wouter!
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 19,
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 03:27:46AM -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
> On 8/29/22 16:02, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > It's my current interpretation that all voting options, even if they
> > might conflict with the DSC, will be on the ballot, and might not
> > require a 3:1 majori
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:00:50PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hi Kurt! Let's send this signed now,
>
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 04:26:40PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 11:26:51AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> Hey Wouter!
> >>
&
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 03:11:25PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
>
> > I like to discussion about anything related to this, so that I can at
> > least get an idea what the consensus is.
>
> DSC 1 and DSC 5 have some implications about "the Debian system" vis-a-vis
> non-free, but the plan here is
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 10:39:57AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> As far as I can tell, both Steve's and Gunnar's proposal would make
> Debian less of a free software operating system than it is today. That
> makes me sad. My preference for an outcome would be along the following
> lines.
>
> =
On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 09:57:45AM +0200, Tobias Frost wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 09:14:53PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 03:11:25PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
> > >
> > > > I like to discussion about anythi
On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 08:00:48PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
>
> Thus, a possible precursor to an interpretive GR is that some person/group
> (e.g. ftpmaster, Project Leader, TC, Secretary[1]) makes the interpretive
> decision.
>
> If someone can make the decision, then they can be overruled[2
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 08:09:15AM +0200, Ansgar wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-09-05 at 21:51 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > You can argue that the developers making the installer and live images,
> > and those maintaining the website can make those decisions. You can even
> > sa
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 08:33:51PM +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 05:26:10PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 06:15:21PM +0200, Bart Martens wrote:
> > >On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 03:43:36AM +0700, Judit Foglszinger wrote:
> > >> > I hereby propose the fol
> seconded
Your message wasn't signed.
Kurt
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 04:50:41PM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
>
> Seconded. Thanks, Russ!
The signature check failed, and the discussion period is over.
Kurt
101 - 200 of 570 matches
Mail list logo
