> I'm curious to hear what you think about this topic.
In my opinion it is a serious problem. Not only about banks: everybody
and everything is willing to install trojan horses in our telephones.
And the telephone is becoming a bad SPoF -- but most users don't care
because everything is backed-up
Paul Boddie:
>> [...]
Bernhard Reiter
> [...]
> Hope it is helpful to see why most of your writings do not convince
> me and they are often not specific enough to be able to answer them
> without a lot of time and research.
On the other hand, I find Paul's posts always enlighting. I do not
always
Hello.
I don't think FSFE should provide coding standard: everybody is
already doing that. Some coding standard make no sense, some are ugly,
some are good; you only need to choose yours -- or be forced by your
employer.
The problem your describe is that of bashisms. I agree we should use
/bin/s
> On the german list someone came up with the eeePC. This is from size exactly
> what I am looking for and you can get them second hand at around 50 euro.
I had 3. One was my laptop (with external keyboard), one was my son's
and the other was my wife's desktop (with external kbd/mouse. One
broke
> Using Mercurial instead of git is also a bit like using another kernel
> instead of Linux. It seems unnecessary to use something else when you already
> have something that works, but it's useful to have working options in case
> you find yourself using a device without a Linux port but with Free
Thanks to all who replied. Let me comment a little on these
recomendations, suggested by Bastien:
>>https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html
>>https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria.en.html
To which Bernhard (and Sandro) noted:
> Not taking new developments into acco
This is the question. Or, better, to github or not to github.
Once upon a time, github was a bad hosting site, because the site code
is not free, and we should have rather preferred gitorious. I
did. But then gitorious closed shop and I had to go to the various
projects (hosted elsewhere) that ha
Thanks Cryptie (and Carsten) for the reply.
>> * What can we bring up on the other hand in favor of publishing as Free
>>Software from a competitive point of view?
> They are asking to assure that people pay multiple times for the same
> work.
> This is not a question of competition but of g
I'll go back for the last time to Daniel's proposal to document use
of non-free software within FSFE. (Thanks Reinhard for reminding that
it doesn't happen). I'd better explain the "hall of shame" idea.
Carsten Agger:
> [...] AND, we're not talking "hall of shame", we're talking
> transparency a
I try to post no more than once a day, for several reasons, but this is
otrageous.
> Some people may have chosen not to attend the meeting so that it
> wouldn't achieve quorum.
Such people may be polite enough to state that clearly in advance,
since they were well aware the council were trying to
Context: Daniel Pocock writes in his own blog that he will repost at
the next GA meeting a motion that did not pass at the previous GA
meeting. Unchanged, seemingly.
Paul Boddie:
>>> I was surprised that Daniel's motion to document the FSFE's proprietary
>>> dependencies, and to describe ways of
Charles:
> I have feared to open my own email for the last 16 hours expecting
> the worst.
I know the feeling. And this is when getting complete silence back is
almost as bad as getting. You end up thinking your message is being
discarded as irrelevant.
That's why, sometimes, I write offlist to p
> This thread is very interesting and it seems that a new discourse is
> developed by FSFE representatives, that is not so much shared by many
> people on this list.
Those who disagree are more vocal than those who agree. Always.
FWIW, I agree (and, yes, I am a member of FSFE). And I chose to k
Carmen Bianca:
>> You are saying that some people deserve
>> your sympathy and support, and other people do not deserve your sympathy
>> and support, by mere virtue of how they were born. I care for
>> _everybody's_ equality and freedom. Surely, I hope, that's a good
>> thing.
Seconded. Thanks a
> [...] let's consider the advantages of negative campaigning:
> + it increases the reach of a message (due to its emotional nature)
Or not. In Europe we are "shocked", "outraged", "indignados" every
day. We've got enough of that. Negative messages have no effect at
all, in my opinion. Then we, (
Charles:
> You actually believe that the
> user's "rights" exceed mine as the author? I'm willing to bet that there
> is at least one other person out there in the FSF(E) community that is
> willing to stand-up and publicly challenge that assertion. Anyone?
Here. As an individual, not representi
16 matches
Mail list logo
