Re: Question about Anthony Towns rebutting Branden Robinson
Previously Martin Michlmayr wrote: Neither weasel nor I remember receiving such an email (or can find anything in our archives). I would suggest checking your mailbox on chic. Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Question about Anthony Towns rebutting Branden Robinson
Previously Martin Michlmayr wrote: OK, I can see this too. Let's CC [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's probably related to the recent move to another machine. I asked the SPI nm folks (which includes you Martin) to verify the members.spi-inc.org setup after moving it to chic. Apparently nobody has done so. Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: drop or keep non-free - from users viewpoint
Previously Raul Miller wrote: One thing I'd really like to see (in apt-get, apt-cache, dpkg, dpkg-deb, and so on), is some kind of tag indicating the origin of the package. You mean like the Origin tag that has been supported for a few years now? Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: drop or keep non-free - from users viewpoint
Previously Raul Miller wrote: One thing I'd really like to see (in apt-get, apt-cache, dpkg, dpkg-deb, and so on), is some kind of tag indicating the origin of the package. You mean like the Origin tag that has been supported for a few years now? Wichert. -- Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]It is simple to make things. http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
Re: Election status
Previously Hamish Moffatt wrote: Another system I saw (many years ago, on fidonet) had the voters submit their own keyword when voting. When the results were published, the vote was published alongside the keyword (but no names). With a lot of people working on a common project to chances of having multiple people select the same keyword are going to be too high. Wichert. -- _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Election status
Previously Hamish Moffatt wrote: Another system I saw (many years ago, on fidonet) had the voters submit their own keyword when voting. When the results were published, the vote was published alongside the keyword (but no names). With a lot of people working on a common project to chances of having multiple people select the same keyword are going to be too high. Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender]
Previously tony mancill wrote: I'm not sure if there's any point in the casual security. I seem to recall all of the votes from last year's election being published in some public place after the voting was complete. Which was a mistake, DPL votes are not public (see the constitution). Wichert. -- _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender]
Previously tony mancill wrote: I'm not sure if there's any point in the casual security. I seem to recall all of the votes from last year's election being published in some public place after the voting was complete. Which was a mistake, DPL votes are not public (see the constitution). Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Regarding localization of Packages files
Previously Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Do you have any precise plan to introduce localized Packages descriptions in dpkg ? Sigh. A DPL can not do that, only the dpkg maintainers can. Wichert. -- _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Regarding localization of Packages files
Previously Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Well, since nothing serious has come from dpkg maitainers, it'd be nice if a decent solution could be worked out. Something serious *has* come from the dpkg maintainer. It is just that everyone seems to be horribly impatient and not interested in seeing a proper fix work on. My advise: get woody out the door. Once that is done we can proceed with normal dpkg development which we can't do know since we can't release the current codebase (insert rant about not having a proper seperate unstable here) and start working on major changes. Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Some questions for the candidates...
Previously Branden Robinson wrote: It's unclear to me how much negative impact we have experienced due to this, aside from occasional poor press. As DPL I'd like to encourage the security team to take on more members if they can find trustworthy and motivated individuals with which to grow their ranks. And as security team we'ld like to get some better support from DSA and buildd maintainer so we don't have to wait as long on build dependencies to be installed and rbuilders to appear (after a few months of asking around we are still at exactly 1 working rbuilder in debian.org..). I'm not quite sure how a DPL can help in that though. 2) Endorsement by major computer manufacturers and or ISV's (like, say, Oracle); I think Debian's profile needs to be higher. There are *still* too many people in the world who think that Red Hat = Linux. Endorsement by Oracle is solely a matter of money: someone will have to spent a nice amount of cash to get woody certified by Oracle. The procedure isn't all that difficult. Wichert. -- _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Opinions on crypto-in-main
Previously Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: 1) Do you think we have all the legal advice necessary to begin implementing the crypto-in-main transition? If not, what would you do to secure what more legal advice you think is needed? I don't think all of the candidates can answer that question, a lot of information was discussed within the crypto team and with the SPI board of directors instead of on the usual Debian mailing lists. We seem to have pretty much everything ready now though. 3) Barring unforeseen difficulties, would you push to have the crypto-in-main transition done during this year? This is more a question for the release manager. Wichert. -- _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Opinions on crypto-in-main
Previously Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: 1) Do you think we have all the legal advice necessary to begin implementing the crypto-in-main transition? If not, what would you do to secure what more legal advice you think is needed? I don't think all of the candidates can answer that question, a lot of information was discussed within the crypto team and with the SPI board of directors instead of on the usual Debian mailing lists. We seem to have pretty much everything ready now though. 3) Barring unforeseen difficulties, would you push to have the crypto-in-main transition done during this year? This is more a question for the release manager. Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: Conclusion of the discussion of voting and super majority concepts?
Previously Ben Collins wrote: Do you still have the code I sent you last election? Ahh.. so that is how you managed to win that time! ;) Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: Withdrawal of the General Resolution about IRC
Previously Jason Gunthorpe wrote: I seem to recall one of the Joey's was the original creator of the channel. Early inhabitors included igor, che_fox and a few others iirc. Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: Withdrawal of the General Resolution about IRC
Previously Branden Robinson wrote: So the people who asked me to leave #debian-devel when I wasn't yet a developer somehow had a premonition of how much of a pain in the ass I would become? :) Yes. We failed in stopping you though :) Wichert. -- _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Withdrawal of the General Resolution about IRC
Previously Branden Robinson wrote: So the people who asked me to leave #debian-devel when I wasn't yet a developer somehow had a premonition of how much of a pain in the ass I would become? :) Yes. We failed in stopping you though :) Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: Withdrawal of the General Resolution about IRC
Previously Raphael Hertzog wrote: Because the most concerned people (Wichert as #debian-devel's channel founder and Branden as an operator) didn't want to participate in the discussion, not even respond to simple questions that would have let us continue the work. Fact is that the last 2 weeks I've been busy with getting started at a new job and have only being doing the really necessary things outside of that. * OpenProjects is not a Debian resource, and I do not think Debian can claim to own a part of it * #debian-devel was created because #debian became too busy with non development related discussions, not because people wanted to a place for private discussions. * #debian-devel has always been a channel for Debian development. It never was a channel restricted to just Debian developers * having non-developers on #debian-devel has been a positive influence: + apsiring developers and others participate in good technical discussions + it is a very useful place to discuss topics that are broader then just debian. For example security problems, LSB topics, etc. * closing #debian-devel to just developers will not have a positive effect: + a number developers of will leave the channel + it will create an image that Debian is a closed organisation, something which we are already suffering from to some degree unfortunately + keeping a channel closed is a lot of work that will just consume valuable time + there has already been a #debian-private channel for a while so I do not see the need to make #debian-devel a copy of that I think we just need a simple etiquette for #debian-devel: * it is a channel for Debian developers, general users questions should be on #debian * keep in mind irc discussions are much like discussions on any public place, so don't talk about things you don't want others to know * #debian-devel is not a helpdesk. We don't mind helping with development issues, but do realize nobody is obliged to answer any questions. * try not to be offensive to people. A bad image is quickly created, but very hard to get rid off. * non-Debian developers we welcome as well, as long as they realize the topic is Debian development Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: Withdrawal of the General Resolution about IRC
Previously Branden Robinson wrote: This simply is not true, as I've said over and over again elsewhere. Ask the people who were there years ago, before you went by the nick wiggy. I was there when the channel was created actually (ok, maybe 1 or 2 days later). Wichert. -- _ /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: I like DDTS
Previously Michael Bramer wrote: this bugs are reminders. Closed bugs are archived anyway. If you get a 'backdoor' bug and you can't fix it, you close the bug? No, I'll remove the package. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: I like DDTS
Previously Sven wrote: Anyway, it may make a good aditional way of getting at the information, but a wishlist (or even using a new severity: translation) bug against the packages would be nicer to find info about the state of translation of one package without having to look trough various thousands of mails. Which means we could clutter the BTS with info that the maintainer can't act on. Having a seperate opt-in system like we do know is a perfectly fine system, I don't see why we would need to change that. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: I like DDTS
Previously Michael Bramer wrote: If you are right, please close all bugs that the maintainer can't act on. I always do. What would the use of a open bugreport be if it can't be resolved anyway? You (or others?) say: it is ok, to sending such bugs to the bts (and maybe it is better, if the ddts send this reports direkt to the maintainer.) I've only seen a single person mention this. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: I like DDTS
Previously Michael Bramer wrote: this bugs are reminders. Closed bugs are archived anyway. If you get a 'backdoor' bug and you can't fix it, you close the bug? No, I'll remove the package. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: And the winner is...
Previously Raul Miller wrote: Shoot me, now. Too bad I no longer have control of the black helicopters now ;) Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: [Mailer-Daemon@master.debian.org: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender]
Previously Christian Surchi wrote: I'm in keyring from more than six months. Is a problem related to an older keyring? Euhm, didn't the message tell you to mail the acting secretary instead of debian-vote? == Message Error: Verification of signature failed Python Stack Trace: ? /org/vote.debian.org/bin/gpgwrapper:149: raise Error, Res[0]; Someone needs to clean up his pythyon code :). It does look like the system is using an outdated keyring though. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DPL Voting procedures
In order to put some more structure in the DPL vote I originally asked Darren Benham to start the procedure on January 3, but nothing happened. After Jason Gunthorpe wondered on January 23 if the DPL should start, the nomination period started on January 24 with Ben Collins mailing his nomination. This gives us the following dates: DPL nomination period: Jan 24 to Feb 13 campaigning period: Feb 14 to March 6 voting period: March 7 to March 28 Which means that the new DPL will be known on March 28. As said before, I've asked Raul Miller to organize the vote. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: vote committee progress report
Previously Jason Gunthorpe wrote: Uh, aren't we supposed to be having a leadership election right now that either you or Darren should be running? I asked Darren to start that process before I left over 2 weeks ago now.. since he didn't respond I asked Raul to run it instead. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: Non-Constitutional Voting Procedure
Previously Chris Lawrence wrote: I'm fairly sure Wichert posted several months ago that he was opposed to Branden's proposal, but I can't seem to find the message locally (and can't even remember what list it was on...). The only reason I remember it is that his opposition surprised me (given his leading role in the last Non-Free Debacle (tm)). That was about moving non-free, not removing it. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Non-Constitutional Voting Procedure
Previously Chris Lawrence wrote: I'm fairly sure Wichert posted several months ago that he was opposed to Branden's proposal, but I can't seem to find the message locally (and can't even remember what list it was on...). The only reason I remember it is that his opposition surprised me (given his leading role in the last Non-Free Debacle (tm)). That was about moving non-free, not removing it. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: Lets speak about freeness, ...
Previously Sven LUTHER wrote: maybe having xfree/mesa stub packages could solve this, Red Hat is doing that for RH7: they are using a dummy libGL that detects what X environment you are using and loads the appropriate library (Xf4, Utah-glx or Mesa). It hasn't been fully tested yet, but it does sound like a possible solution. (they needed this because they are going to ship both XF4 and XF3 X servers) Wichert. -- _ / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | pgpp9bPJP4M5O.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [BALLOT] Leader Election 2000
Previously Darren O. Benham wrote: heck if I know.. I just woke up one night with a bright light shining in my eyes telling me that I had to add three hidden options to the ballot and if I didn't, my cat would not suffer any accidents... Hmm, I pity your cat. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | pgpYlUjpqnC1v.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: non-free software question
Previously Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: My understanding is that this is being coded for dpkg / dselect even as you read this. dpkg should already do it, although I haven't tested it enough (so you might get a failed assertion if you use it). GNU has hired someone to implement it for dselect; unfortunately he seems to be a very busy guy and I haven't seen any code from him yet.. It's definitely planned for woody at any rate. Wichert.
DPL Nomination, part 2
My current term as project leader is almost but and elections are close, so I guess it's time for people to send out long boring emails about why they want to be project leader.. and I feel compelled to join them :) I've been doing this for almost a year now, and it has been a very interesting experience. I have learned a lot in various areas and I think that with that experience I would make a good candidate for the position of DPL. So with this mail I declare my candidacy for the position of DPL for the next year. And now for the obligatory background: I'm currently a 24 year old male human (and don't plan on changing that either :). I'm dividing my time between finishing up my MSc in Computer Science at Leiden University, working as developer for Cistron, the occasional Debian activity and enjoying the real world. I'm the current upstream maintainer of dpkg and strace, and maintain a whole set of other Debian packages as well (see www.debian.org for the complete list). I'm also a member of the Debian security team, a couple of advisory boards, and have been the DPL for almost a year now. I'll stop now before everyone gets too bored and stops reading ;) Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | pgpCblaHoPmO5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org
Previously Richard Stallman wrote: I saw a proposal to replace the non-US category with a different kind of labelling which is more general. That seems like a good idea to me. Indeed. The major problem with that proposal is that it would force mirrors to use special software to mirror the archive. Personally I'ld love to see it happen though. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpGuR1Sw8ASA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Negative Summary of the Split Proposal
Previously Richard Braakman wrote: Too Vague ~~~ ~ Implementation of this proposal is not straightforward, and is left largely unspecified. This makes it hard to understand the full effects of the proposal. It is not necessarily a problem at this stage, but it should be rectified before a General Resolution is proposed. This is actually on purpose. Since I don't know all the details about how the mirrors are handled, the archive is maintained, etc. I think this is an issue better decided by more knowledgeable people. We are talking about a strategt to solve a general issue. How the technical implementation of the result of the should be done can be decided after the vote just as well I think. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgp61ofQpa4Qo.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Negative Summary of the Split Proposal
Previously Jason Gunthorpe wrote: The Proposal is Counter to the Social Contract ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ If you read the social contract you'll see that the very first point is `Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software'. In my opinion that means that adding a slight inconvenience (especially now that we have tools like dpkg-http and apt) is a minor price to pay for the benefits we will get. The proposal may violate the spirit of section 5 of the Social Contract http://www.debian.org/social_contract which says that non-free and contrib are not a part of The Debian Distribution but that Debian will use its resources to support them as a service to its users. I don't see where we would violate this section. We will still have an archive with non-free and contrib and we will still use our normal resources for them. They will be in a seperate location though. It is Only the Start.. ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ I already answered this in a response to a post from Joseph Carter. Too Specific ~~~ The proposal does not set any sort of general rule but addresses a single problem with a single site. Even after voting the question will still remain if anything should be done with non-us, the web site and other places the contain references that may confuse users about the separation that exists. I realized too late that non-US should have been included in the proposal. I intend to send an ammendment this week to fix that. For web-sites, documentation, etc. I don't feel currently that removing references to non-free and contrib is the way to go. Hiding those does not help us. Making the distinction clearer does. Cost I'm aware of the costs involved. I'm also confident that we'll find a way to get the proper resources. The biggest problem I foresee currently is simply manpower. Ultimately for this point it is a personal matter of when the cost exceeds the value. Agreed. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpv4ya5ZWpjB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Negative Summary of the Split Proposal
Previously Joseph Carter wrote: I will withdraw my objections in a heartbeat if I know that the implementation details of this proposal Wichert chose not to write about won't result in hiding non-free and making it difficult to get at. At the moment I don't intend to propose or suggest that we remove all references to non-free software from the webpages. That would be a disservice to our users. It's also a bit unrelated: I don't want to hide non-free, I want have it somewhere seperate and clearly seperate from the rest of the archive. Removing all references to non-free packages from the webpages strikes me as hiding possibly useful information, which is not something we should do. Pretending something isn't there or ignoring not is not going to help us. Making a great free distribution will. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgposXIfUlauP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org
Previously Joey Hess wrote: I would like to amend this to make it say non-free.debian.org. That is consitent with non-us.debian.org and with the current section name, non-free. Sounds reasonable. I'm open to other suggestions as well, the main options are the way the split is made. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgp4Xv9U6YnK6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org
Previously Joey Hess wrote: How about not.debian.org? debian.nonfree.org :) Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpll2VXWfR3L.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Ad hoc and spontaneous voting
Previously Manoj Srivastava wrote: Hi, Wichert == Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Wichert Previously Manoj Srivastava wrote: Most votes (like the non-free issue) have been called with no formal proposal, seconds, or a discussion period. I have strong feeling against taking any action whatsoever merely on these votes. Wichert Ahum? The non-free issue a) hasn't had a call for votes Wichert yet. I announced I want to decide this via a vote, which Wichert would be your formal proposal. Your first and second point seem to be basically the same: you think the current method is not visible enough. There are currently no rules or guidelines that state how exactly proposals, seconds and cfv's should be made. Can you think of a set of simple guidelines for this? Most people so far seem to want us to spam every possible debian list with this information, but I feel that is a very bad solution. Thirdly, I wouldrather we not turn everything automatically into a general resolution from the word go. Set up a floater, or something, and let people chew it out a bit. It hasn't been possible for long now to use general resolutions, I think we need some more experience with them to see for what they are fit and what can better be decided using other means. I still think the moving-non-free proposal is fit for decision via a general solution by the way. I think in this case a two week discussion period is nowhere near long enough for a contentios issue like this. This specific issue has been discussed at length at least once this year, and at least twice last year. Both times the discussions lasted about 2 weeks and then died off. If the discussion is still raging next week and new arguments are being made I can postpone issueing the call for votes, but I don't expect that to be necessary. Wichert. pgpDlJc4sq3Wo.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Ad hoc and spontaneous voting
Previously Manoj Srivastava wrote: Most votes (like the non-free issue) have been called with no formal proposal, seconds, or a discussion period. I have strong feeling against taking any action whatsoever merely on these votes. Ahum? The non-free issue a) hasn't had a call for votes yet. I announced I want to decide this via a vote, which would be your formal proposal. Since I did that as the DPL no seconds were needed. From that moment the standard discussion period standard (2 weeks). Which means that I can issue the call for votes next week. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpysxcKmQZza.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org
Previously Richard Stallman wrote: This way of holding the vote would tend to split the support for change. I worry that 100 people might vote for 1, 100 people might vote for 2, while 110 people might vote for 3--and 3 would win. Our voting system allows voters to vote for multiple options (and in fact most people seem to use that feature). This allows one to say `I really prefer the first option, but if that isn't a reachable goal the second option is also good'. Does that solve your worries? Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgp3PgFWdgySx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Moving contrib and non-free of master.debian.org
I already mentioned a while ago that I think that the distinction between main and contrib non-free is becoming less clear, both to users and developers. The Debian distribution itself consists only of the main-tree. Contrib and non-free are there mostly as a (popular) service to our users. But the distinction isn't as visible as it used to be; advances in searching in the distribution and tools like apt make it very hard to see when something is in main and when not. Just using seperate trees in the archive isn't as effective a method making the distinction anymore as it used to be. The social contract has as the very first item `Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software'. So we need to do something to make once again clear to everyone exactly what Debian is and show more clearly what we don't consider to be free. I see two ways of doing that: I. Create a new host, nonfree.debian.org and move non-free and contrib there and ask our mirrors if they can consider also mirroring that. II. Create a new host, official.debian.org and copy main there and use that consistantly when we refer to the Debian distribution. Personally I strongly prefer the first option: it makes it much more clear that the Debian distribution contains only DFSG-free software, and that contrib and nonfree are an extra. I hereby propose to resolve this matter by General Resolution (ie a vote). The ballot will contain the options: 1) create nonfree.debian.org domain 2) create official.debian.org domain 3) keep the current situation 4) further discussion We'll determine the exact number of voters, Q and the quorum at the time the call for votes is send out. Since this resolution is proposed by me acting as the Project Leader no sponsors are required. Wichert. -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgpcw5uiuJVzA.pgp Description: PGP signature
complaints about vote announcements (was: Re: The Ugly Logo and the Consequences)
Why is this discussion a) being held here, and b) using a subject that doesn't even come close the what is being discussed? While I have your attention, let me say that I think the CFVs are currently being send to the right lists (-devel-announce and -vote). Sending them to more mailinglist does not make much sense I think. Both lists (especially -devel-announce) should (if they aren't currently) be mentioned as highly recommend (and low traffic) reading material. Furthermore if people weren't aware that a vote is happening they are probably not informed enough to cast a proper vote. These days votes are announced on 2 of our lists, our webpage, DWN, and a bunch of newssites such as slashdot. You almost have to try not to become aware of them.. Wichert (who is about to announce another big vote :). -- == This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman. E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.wi.leidenuniv.nl/~wichert/ pgp7v2M8Y2pu0.pgp Description: PGP signature
