On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 05:30 -0500, Michael Tindal wrote:
> I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this yet, but the software
> patent vote from the EU is in. 684 in favor of rejecting, 14 not in
> favor of rejecting, and 18 abstaining.
>
> Mike Tindal
>
Reading mono's internals makes me dyslexi
6.7.2005, 12:30:43, Michael Tindal wrote:
> I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this yet, but the software
> patent vote from the EU is in. 684 in favor of rejecting, 14 not in
> favor of rejecting, and 18 abstaining.
> Mike Tindal
Wow!
/me is quickly running to the fridge to open a bottl
I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this yet, but the software
patent vote from the EU is in. 684 in favor of rejecting, 14 not in
favor of rejecting, and 18 abstaining.
Mike Tindal
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 04:07 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
> tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who make heavy
> use of software patents? That would be far more effective, and may
> even encourage a few mainstrea
Of course not -- Grunthos the Flatulent was the inventor of vaporware
Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
>On 7/5/05, Kumba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>2) This pointless debate will eventually die, because if it doesn't
>> I'm going to start quoting select excerpts from Vogon Poet
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 15:14 +1000, Stuart Longland wrote:
> Good luck finding a decent video card for that lovely desktop of yours. :-)
Who needs video cards? My old VT-100 A4 terminal works just fine.
./Brix
--
Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 10:09 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 06:13 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> > > Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> > > advocate something with *words* would be prepa
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 11:59:26PM -0700, Anthony Gorecki wrote:
> On Monday, July 04, 2005 11:19 pm, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > I am wondering why we have anonymous trolls on this mailing list.
>
> This is a public mailing list that doesn't use message filters.
>
I am aware of this, however general
On 05/07/05, Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 06:13 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> > Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> > advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
> > *actions*. I think it's a shame th
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 06:13 +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
> *actions*. I think it's a shame that Gentoo is prepared to encourage
> people to pester their po
twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Robert Paskowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>You have encouraged gentoo to remove patent-encoumbered software from
>>portage. I'd like to see you personally work with only software that
>>does not contain any patented work.
>
> No, I have encouraged Gentoo to
On 7/5/05, Kumba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2) This pointless debate will eventually die, because if it doesn't
>I'm going to start quoting select excerpts from Vogon Poetry.
>
> 3) If the Vogon Poetry fails, I'll start reading excerpts from
>Grunthos the
twofourtysix wrote:
Not being privy to -core either, I am wondering about the apparently
hypocritical stance being taken on this issue.
I'm not sure if you caught the last few mails, but as stated, opinions posted on
the Planet/Blog/Bathroom Stall are simply _opinions_ of individual entities.
On Monday, July 04, 2005 10:13 pm, twofourtysix wrote:
> Mostly, I was hoping that all those people who seem more than happy to
> advocate something with *words* would be prepared to back them up with
> *actions*.
I advocate that more rapid stabilization of the tree would be very useful for
the u
Anthony Gorecki wrote:
> On Monday, July 04, 2005 10:14 pm, Stuart Longland wrote:
>
>>Why stop there? Why not extend it to hardware manufacturers that make
>>heavy use of patents?
>>
>>Good luck finding a decent video card for that lovely desktop of yours. :-)
>
> I'm still holding out hope tha
On Monday, July 04, 2005 11:19 pm, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> I am wondering why we have anonymous trolls on this mailing list.
This is a public mailing list that doesn't use message filters.
--
Anthony Gorecki
Ectro-Linux Foundation
pgp3MElZoJB2f.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
twofourtysix wrote:
>> On 05/07/05, Robert Paskowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>
You have encouraged gentoo to remove patent-encoumbered software from
portage. I'd like to see you personally work with only software that
does not conta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Jon Portnoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:59:24AM +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
>>
>>>uncensored, I'll accept that Gentoo as an organisation has no
>>>influence over the content. Otherwise, b
maillog: 04/07/2005-21:38:01(-0700): Anthony Gorecki types
> On Monday, July 04, 2005 9:15 pm, Brian Jackson wrote:
> > If someone removes something that belongs to me, software patents or not,
> > I'll be asking for removal of (at the very least) their cvs access.
>
> I believe that the original
On 05/07/05, Jon Portnoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:59:24AM +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> > uncensored, I'll accept that Gentoo as an organisation has no
> > influence over the content. Otherwise, by moderating the contents,
> > Gentoo is implicitly accepting responsibil
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 07:01:34AM +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > not being privvy to -core ( where I hear this was started and
> > subsequently moved to -dev ) I can only assume you didn't find what you
> > wanted on -core and are trolling for
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:59:24AM +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> uncensored, I'll accept that Gentoo as an organisation has no
> influence over the content. Otherwise, by moderating the contents,
> Gentoo is implicitly accepting responsibility for the items which
> remain.
>
So the fact that the f
Not to mention all the software written in Java ... and other things in
the Portage tree like VMWare ... skype ... acroread ...
Really ... you can take those out of the Portage tree. I can -- and
often do -- download them directly and install them. On Gentoo, CentOS,
Debian, Fedora and Windows. It
On 05/07/05, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> not being privvy to -core ( where I hear this was started and
> subsequently moved to -dev ) I can only assume you didn't find what you
> wanted on -core and are trolling for a decent response here.
Not being privy to -core either, I am wonderi
On 05/07/05, Robert Paskowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You have encouraged gentoo to remove patent-encoumbered software from
> portage. I'd like to see you personally work with only software that
> does not contain any patented work.
No, I have encouraged Gentoo to remove software written by c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
not being privvy to -core ( where I hear this was started and
subsequently moved to -dev ) I can only assume you didn't find what you
wanted on -core and are trolling for a decent response here.
I am certain there are people who agree with you on a id
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> > I personally am not going around encouraging people to take a stance
> upon an issue whilst simultaneously helping out the very people
> against whom one is supposed to be standing.
You have encouraged gentoo to remove patent-encoumbered software
On 05/07/05, Robert Paskowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you personally prepared to practice what you preach? You had better
> start by uninstalling the linux kernel...
I personally am not going around encouraging people to take a stance
upon an issue whilst simultaneously helping out the ve
On Monday, July 04, 2005 10:14 pm, Stuart Longland wrote:
> Why stop there? Why not extend it to hardware manufacturers that make
> heavy use of patents?
>
> Good luck finding a decent video card for that lovely desktop of yours. :-)
I'm still holding out hope that the open sourced video card pro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Are you personally prepared to practice what you preach? You had better
start by uninstalling the linux kernel...
twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/07/05, Anthony Gorecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>On Monday, July 04, 2005 9:15 pm, Brian Jackson wrote:
On Monday 04 July 2005 11:07 pm, twofourtysix wrote:
> Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
> tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who make heavy
> use of software patents?
not a chance
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
twofourtysix wrote:
> I applaud all those people on the Planet who are posting
> anti-software-patent banners in their blogs. It's good to see yet
> another major software project taking a stance.
Heh, notice mine's not amongst them... but it will be. I'm carefully
constructing my post now. :-)
On 05/07/05, Anthony Gorecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday, July 04, 2005 9:15 pm, Brian Jackson wrote:
> > If someone removes something that belongs to me, software patents or not,
> > I'll be asking for removal of (at the very least) their cvs access.
>
> I believe that the original pos
On Monday, July 04, 2005 9:15 pm, Brian Jackson wrote:
> If someone removes something that belongs to me, software patents or not,
> I'll be asking for removal of (at the very least) their cvs access.
I believe that the original poster's intent was to post a request for
comments, although it was
If someone removes something that belongs to me, software patents or not, I'll
be asking for removal of (at the very least) their cvs access. If not, I'll be
asking for their total removal from the project. You can have all the views you
want on the world. I do. This is a technical project, not you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I don't really see removing software from the tree because it's made by
a company that uses software patents as a choice that improves the user
experience with Gentoo. It doesn't make Gentoo more useful for anyone.
Just as software thats not open sou
I applaud all those people on the Planet who are posting
anti-software-patent banners in their blogs. It's good to see yet
another major software project taking a stance.
Are these people prepared to back up their views by removing from the
tree all those ebuilds for software made by companies who
37 matches
Mail list logo
