On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 12:15:06AM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
So now that we're in crazy-as-batshit land, who do you want to bring up
on charges next?
I suggest an inquisition. Nobody ever expects that.
This has been coming over the last year, the signs where there, you just
failed to see
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:22:24AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 13:04, MJ Ray wrote:
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
to the removal from the distribution (main) of software that could be
Please, drop the scare quotes on software.
No, I don't think so.
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I suppose we could have a lengthy email
exchange, and assume that the sponsors are still paying attention to
every mail in the deluge that is -vote;
On which subject, does anyone else think that it would be useful to
leave debian-vote for formal proposals/seconds
Le jeudi 21 septembre 2006 à 00:15 +0100, Stephen Gran a écrit :
So, just to be clear, you want to punish a Debian developer for their
activities outside of Debian?
Have you only *read* the rationale?
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\
: :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `'
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
§ 5.3. Procedure
The Project Leader should attempt to make decisions which are
consistent with the consensus of the opinions of the Developers.
The debate has been launched on -private, but it's clear to everyone
that we were very
There's always None of the above, but I am pissed enough by the
attitude of some developers that I want to reaffirm support for the
elected DPL whatever he does to suppose Debian outside of the project.
(The text of the proposal is attached.)
--
Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Debian
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Loïc Minier wrote:
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Duck Tank, lead
by
I'm sorry for the typo, it is Dunc-Tank. Updated text attached.
--
Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Loïc Minier wrote:
I'm sorry for the typo, it is Dunc-Tank. Updated text attached.
How embarassing. I keep making typos, I hope this cheers readers up.
--
Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project does not
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Loïc Minier wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Loïc Minier wrote:
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Duck Tank,
lead by
I'm sorry for the typo, it is Dunc-Tank. Updated text attached.
I'm seconding the proposal/amendment below (with the typo
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 09:13:59PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I still think that the constitution needs be amended, and here
is my off the cuff diff for it:
[...]
If you ever take this to a vote (but *please* wait until the current
stream of discussion^W flame^W decision making is
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 11:19:08PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 04:05:26PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
[Sven Luther]
and i am under control of Frans over any post i make if i ever want
to go back to working on d-i as i did before, and everyone found that
also sprach Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.09.21.1008 +0200]:
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Duck Tank, lead
by
Anthony Towns, the current DPL, and Steve Mc Intyre, the Second in Charge.
However, this
Loïc Minier wrote:
the first
sentence of the article is The volunteer-based Debian GNU/Linux is
experimenting with ...
Why on earth are you giving a shit to some random broken article?
It's not a random article, it's the link
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:39:52AM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
How embarassing. I keep making typos, I hope this cheers readers up.
[...]
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Dunc-Tank, lead
by
Anthony Towns, the
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:55:40AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 11:19:08PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 04:05:26PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
[Sven Luther]
and i am under control of Frans over any post i make if i ever want
to go
[I am using a webmail from work, sorry for breaking the thread]
[Loic Minier]
So, did the Debian Project Leader take the decision to fund our RMs,
for example with Debian's money? Did he take the decision to
officially request funding? NO.
Instead, he did his best to take off his
Qui, 2006-09-21 às 10:08 +0200, Loïc Minier escreveu:
There's always None of the above, but I am pissed enough by the
attitude of some developers that I want to reaffirm support for the
elected DPL whatever he does to suppose Debian outside of the project.
(The text of the proposal is
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Denis Barbier wrote:
Now, if you strip your counter-proposal down to
The Dunc project is not the result of a decision of the Debian Project
I will second it and withdraw my proposal.
While I could do this, our voting system makes it ok to have very
similar
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:34:09AM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Dunk-Tank, lead
by
Anthony Towns, the current DPL, and Steve Mc Intyre, the Second in Charge.
However, this
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 07:43:22PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
Anthony Towns ends up his announce[1] about dunc-tank.org with these
two paragraphs: [...]
A question that has been raised is whether the
organisation can be sufficiently outside of Debian when
the DPL is intimately
also sprach Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.09.21.1206 +0200]:
Because it is a general trend i see in debian since last year or so,
I also see a trend, namely that you increasingly annoy me. Just when
I was about ready to forget all the crap that went down with your
name on it, you manage to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
=== START OF GR PROPOSAL =
Given that the current set of issues held up to
vote, as well as the dispute over them and over
whether the secretary can excercice common sense
and judgement when casting the ballot, the debian
project
Le jeu 21 septembre 2006 03:30, John Goerzen a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 02:26:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
The debate has been launched on -private, but it's clear to
everyone that we were very far from a consensus[2]. So, instead of
*beeing consistent* with the *consensus*
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:01:59PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.09.21.1206 +0200]:
Because it is a general trend i see in debian since last year or so,
I also see a trend, namely that you increasingly annoy me. Just when
I was about ready to
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:39:52AM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Loïc Minier wrote:
I'm sorry for the typo, it is Dunc-Tank. Updated text attached.
How embarassing. I keep making typos, I hope this cheers readers up.
--
Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
The
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 10:02:08AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:40:08 +0200, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 10:27:12PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
Proponents of various various amendments to the GR should feel free
to send
This one time, at band camp, Loïc Minier said:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Loïc Minier wrote:
I'm sorry for the typo, it is Dunc-Tank. Updated text attached.
How embarassing. I keep making typos, I hope this cheers readers up.
--
Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Debian Project
This one time, at band camp, Denis Barbier said:
[I am using a webmail from work, sorry for breaking the thread]
[Loic Minier]
So, did the Debian Project Leader take the decision to fund our RMs,
for example with Debian's money? Did he take the decision to
officially request funding?
also sprach Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.09.21.1302 +0200]:
In order to not distract our developpers from
their technical work and the timely release of
etch, the GR voting procedure, both currently
ongoing and future, will be frozen until the
release of etch, hoping that
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
3. That structure wants to pay the RM's.
This is oversimplified. The structure offers itself to collect funds
which will be clearly directed towards releasing etch by subventionning
time of the RMs. It's not like the structure was collecting
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 05:39, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 01:47:18AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
The project acknowledges that a lot of progress has been made with
regard to the removal from the distribution (main) of software that
could be considered non-free given the
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 11:09, Sven Luther wrote:
The position of the d-i team has so far been presented by Joey Hess and
there have been some contributions from other d-i team members (Yoe,
p2-mate, bubulle). Joey has given an overview of the impact of removing
firmware from main on
On Thursday 14 September 2006 13:05, Ron wrote:
The Debian Project resolves that:
(a) The inclusion in main of sourceless firmware and support in
Debian Installer is not a release blocker for the release of Etch.
I believe I would prefer to see this read:
(a) The inclusion in
Coin,
Denis Barbier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But we, Debian developers, can make this confusion vanish, and I
would like to propose that we answer to the valid question quoted
in the second paragraph above by recalling our Project Leader, as
allowed by our Constitution (section 4.1.1) and
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 05:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
implementation of a solution for firmware/non-free drivers in d-i has
been discussed but consensus was that there was not much point in
working on it while there was no separation in the kernel;
This is half-true.
It is true
Le mercredi 20 septembre 2006 à 23:30 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
Le mercredi 20 septembre 2006 à 19:43 +0200, Denis Barbier a écrit :
But we, Debian developers, can make this confusion vanish, and I
would like to propose that we answer to the valid question quoted
in the second
Le jeudi 21 septembre 2006 à 16:00 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
Le mercredi 20 septembre 2006 à 23:30 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
Le mercredi 20 septembre 2006 à 19:43 +0200, Denis Barbier a écrit :
But we, Debian developers, can make this confusion vanish, and I
would like to
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Second, because the DPL is trying to use this GR as a means to
legitimate his own project, and this would be the worst result.
I'm withdrawing my support because the developers might agree with AJ
rather than me? Come on.
--
Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL
Le jeudi 21 septembre 2006 à 15:09 +0100, Matthew Garrett a écrit :
I'm withdrawing my support because the developers might agree with AJ
rather than me? Come on.
Or maybe I'm withdrawing my support because I'm busy with my chainsaw.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\
: :' :
If that's not your goal but your ideals are offended because
volunteers are getting paid, consider that you are the problem, not
the project.
If you reply to GR proposals with the clever and useful phrase *Not*
seconded in some silly attempt to bully people into quietly putting
up with
Hi,
Since this GR contradicts what the constitution says about how
general resolutions are conducted, it must pass with a 3:1 majority
for it to take hold.
manoj
--
A loaf of bread, the Walrus said, is what we chiefly need.
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 12:58:34AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 11:09, Sven Luther wrote:
The position of the d-i team has so far been presented by Joey Hess and
there have been some contributions from other d-i team members (Yoe,
p2-mate, bubulle). Joey has given
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 12:50:36AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 05:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
implementation of a solution for firmware/non-free drivers in d-i has
been discussed but consensus was that there was not much point in
working on it while there was no
Anthony Towns wrote:
AIUI, if the resolution passes, the secretary will need to setup an
immediate election, which will take nine weeks. During those nine
weeks, the technical committee chair (Bdale Garbee) and secretary
(Manoj Srivastava) will jointly exercise the DPL's powers where
needed.
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 05:13:48PM +0200, Amaya wrote:
Anthony Towns wrote:
AIUI, if the resolution passes, the secretary will need to setup an
immediate election, which will take nine weeks. During those nine
weeks, the technical committee chair (Bdale Garbee) and secretary
(Manoj
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:08:17PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
If aj's stops beeing a member of dunc-tank, and do not works publicily
for that dunc-tank, then I remove my second here, he can stay as DPL.
If he prefers dunc-tank, and work for it, he must not be a delegate
anymore, and
On 9/21/06, Nick Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On which subject, does anyone else think that it would be useful to
leave debian-vote for formal proposals/seconds (possibly moderated), and
another list e.g. debian-vote-discuss (or even just -project) for the
flame^Wdiscussions that follow?
On 9/21/06, I wrote:
Personally, I'd say that if the situation is so ambiguous ...
Note that nothing I said here in any way overrides the procedures
the Secretary posted to dda -- I should have read that announcement
before posting.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
Le jeu 21 septembre 2006 18:04, Graham Wilson a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:08:17PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
If aj's stops beeing a member of dunc-tank, and do not works
publicily for that dunc-tank, then I remove my second here, he can
stay as DPL. If he prefers dunc-tank, and
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 07:10:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
I'd say that I'm not more comfortable with Steve McIntyre beeing
involved and a DPL-assistant (or whatever name his position has)
either, so if Aj stops beeing involved with dunc-tank, (1) is in fact
half solved.
Then
Le jeu 21 septembre 2006 20:44, Graham Wilson a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 07:10:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
I'd say that I'm not more comfortable with Steve McIntyre beeing
involved and a DPL-assistant (or whatever name his position has)
either, so if Aj stops beeing involved
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 12:45:59PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Denis Barbier wrote:
Now, if you strip your counter-proposal down to
The Dunc project is not the result of a decision of the Debian Project
I will second it and withdraw my proposal.
While I could do
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't care about just the proposers opinion, I want to
ensure that what the proposer is telling me is what the people and
the sponsors also agreed to. I suppose we could have a lengthy email
exchange, and assume that the sponsors are
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 07:44:20PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
No one has asked that the vote.d.o pages include background
material. I have asked that the text of resolutions not be
misleadingly edited
Miisleadingly edited? Wittingly or unwittingly? Are you
claiming that the
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Denis Barbier wrote:
It has a better chance of success if it is proposed by someone who is
seen as supporting this experiment. Given the heated reactions, I
doubt that I am the adequate person.
Check [EMAIL PROTECTED], which is a GPG signed
ballot proposal (as I
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Denis Barbier wrote:
My proposal was intended to be straightforward, to answer a simple
question: whether the [Dunc] organisation can be sufficiently
outside of Debian when the DPL is intimately involved.
It obviously failed, many people got it wrong.
Obviously, some
Dear Debian developers,
As an amendement to the firmware GR, I hereby propose the following
position statement.
===
THE DEBIAN PROJECT:
1. reaffirms its dedication to providing a 100% free system to
our users according to our Social Contract
THIRD CALL FOR VOTES FOR THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT GR
= === = === === == = ==
Voting period starts 00:00:01 UTC on Sunday, 10th September, 2006
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on Saturday, 23rd September, 2006.
The following
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 11:43:11PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Denis Barbier wrote:
My proposal was intended to be straightforward, to answer a simple
question: whether the [Dunc] organisation can be sufficiently
outside of Debian when the DPL is intimately involved.
---
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Dunc-Tank, led by
Anthony Towns, the current DPL, and Steve Mc Intyre, the Second in Charge.
However, this particular experiment is not the result of a decision of the
Debian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I second the following proposal by Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED],
marked by = lines.
=
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Dunc-Tank, lead by
Anthony Towns, the
--begin--
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Dunc-Tank, lead
by
Anthony Towns, the current DPL, and Steve Mc Intyre, the Second in Charge.
However, this particular experiment is not the result of a
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:08:41AM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
There's always None of the above, but I am pissed enough by the
attitude of some developers that I want to reaffirm support for the
elected DPL whatever he does to suppose Debian outside of the project.
A recall vote falls under
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm seconding the following proposal made by Loïc Minier:
- -
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Duck Tank, lead
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Instead, after 4-6 weeks beyond the date of the priginal
proposal, allow for 4*K developers to cut the proposal time short
(say, impose a deadline of now + 2 weeks). This means not only that
the interval is large, but a number of developers
Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, I'm concerned that the model we propose moving to may be much
more dubious from a legal standpoint. Basically I'm not sure, and
without a legal review I'm sure I can't support it.
Could you state what concerns you have? I don't think there can be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm still seconding Loïc Minier's (typo-corrected) proposal:
- --
The Debian Project reaffirms its support to its DPL.
The Debian Project does not object to the experiment named Dunc-Tank,
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 09:21:17AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
Since this GR contradicts what the constitution says about how
general resolutions are conducted, it must pass with a 3:1 majority
for it to take hold.
Indeed, this was also my opinion on this, but given the
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 12:33:28AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Dear Debian developers,
Oh, you are also in the filibustering effort ? :)
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Note to list-masters:
Please circumvent the ban on me for debian-release, and have the integrity
of my mails concerning this thread reach that mailing list too for
completeness of this rather important discussion. -- Thanks.
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 02:58:31AM -0500, Bill Allombert wrote:
Manoj, ...
This issue remains, and it is still not solved. This has got the approval of
Steve Langasek (who said that his proposal and this where orthogonal and a
separate GR), of our DPL, who said he would postpone his own GR proposal for
post etch, as well as the proposer of this GR.
There
71 matches
Mail list logo
