Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:35:47 +0100
Sender: Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you are not able to understand what Free software
means, maybe you don't want to use Debian. There are plenty
non-free operating systems out there, no one here will blame you
for choosing one of
Is it too much if somebody says Please let others know that I did
wrote this manual? Also, please don't let them change my personal
opinions about X, Y and Z.? Yes, it is too much and that's why we
need GNU FDL.
# #181494: GNU Free Documentation License is non-free Package:
glibc;
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 22:32:59 -0600
From: Chad Walstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 08:20:40PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: On
Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:19:40AM +0200, Mikko Moilanen wrote:
Declare it as nonfree and I will quit immediatly using Debian, and
I will
On 2004-03-12 22:49:26 + Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 12:02:53PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
It seems reasonable to ask whether the maintainer can just close or
ignore
the bug as invalid before N people file M bugs against non-free with
apparent replacements in
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 07:17:59PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't understand you. You claim that all the packages in non-free
should go, and when i point you out a method on how to do that, you
refuse to do that and speak bureaucrasy.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then after a time, either when he agrees or he is being unreasonable,
you bring the issue before the technical comittee, which can override
the maintainer if he is being wrongly stubborn.
Except that the Technical Committee does *not* have the right to
Mikko Moilanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you cant understand what means
4. Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software
then I will recommend that you think about some philosophy in the mean
time too.
Of course. And I believe that the long-term interests of our users
are not
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 05:32:13PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Short memory. Don't some FSF machines use Debian?
I think basically all of them do. It should go without saying: sans
non-free.
Regards,
Mako
--
Benjamin Mako Hill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mako.yukidoke.org/
signature.asc
Description:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 02:22:41AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then after a time, either when he agrees or he is being unreasonable,
you bring the issue before the technical comittee, which can override
the maintainer if he is being wrongly
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 02:22:41AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then after a time, either when he agrees or he is being unreasonable,
you bring the issue before the technical comittee, which can override
the maintainer if he is being wrongly
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:33:32AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-12 22:49:26 + Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 12:02:53PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
It seems reasonable to ask whether the maintainer can just close or
ignore
the bug as invalid before N people
On 2004-03-13 14:36:21 + Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:33:32AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-12 22:49:26 + Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 12:02:53PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
It seems reasonable to ask whether the maintainer
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 02:13:03PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On 08 Mar 2004 13:49:57 -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:46:42AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG
wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:35:47 +0100
Sender: Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you are not able to understand what Free software
means, maybe you don't want to use Debian. There are plenty
non-free operating systems out there, no one here will blame you
for choosing one of
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 22:32:59 -0600
From: Chad Walstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 08:20:40PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: On
Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:19:40AM +0200, Mikko Moilanen wrote:
Declare it as nonfree and I will quit immediatly using Debian, and
I will
On 2004-03-12 22:49:26 + Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 12:02:53PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
It seems reasonable to ask whether the maintainer can just close or
ignore
the bug as invalid before N people file M bugs against non-free with
apparent replacements in
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 07:17:59PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't understand you. You claim that all the packages in non-free
should go, and when i point you out a method on how to do that, you
refuse to do that and speak bureaucrasy.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then after a time, either when he agrees or he is being unreasonable,
you bring the issue before the technical comittee, which can override
the maintainer if he is being wrongly stubborn.
Except that the Technical Committee does *not* have the right to
Mikko Moilanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you cant understand what means
4. Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software
then I will recommend that you think about some philosophy in the mean
time too.
Of course. And I believe that the long-term interests of our users
are not
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 05:32:13PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Short memory. Don't some FSF machines use Debian?
I think basically all of them do. It should go without saying: sans
non-free.
Regards,
Mako
--
Benjamin Mako Hill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mako.yukidoke.org/
signature.asc
Description:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 02:22:41AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then after a time, either when he agrees or he is being unreasonable,
you bring the issue before the technical comittee, which can override
the maintainer if he is being wrongly
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 02:22:41AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then after a time, either when he agrees or he is being unreasonable,
you bring the issue before the technical comittee, which can override
the maintainer if he is being wrongly
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:33:32AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-12 22:49:26 + Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 12:02:53PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
It seems reasonable to ask whether the maintainer can just close or
ignore
the bug as invalid before N people
On 2004-03-13 14:36:21 + Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:33:32AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-12 22:49:26 + Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 12:02:53PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
It seems reasonable to ask whether the
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 02:13:03PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On 08 Mar 2004 13:49:57 -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:46:42AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG
wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
Sure they do:
4. Overrule a Developer (requires a 3:1 majority).
The Technical Committee may ask a Developer to take a particular
technical course of action even if the Developer does not wish to;
this requires a 3:1
From: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You may (or may not) be interested in:
http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.html
Well, I am interested about subject and so I will read available
information. Conversation about subject is over from me untill I have
catched up.
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
Sure they do:
4. Overrule a Developer (requires a 3:1 majority).
The Technical Committee may ask a Developer to take a particular
technical course of action even if the Developer does not wish to;
this requires a
28 matches
Mail list logo
