On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:45:46PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 02:10:23PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
At the risk of repeating myself (I already said it in an answer to
Charles' GR proposal), these core values are also what all DDs agreed to
abide by. If Charles doesn't
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 07:19:43PM +, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org writes:
So, I apologize, but I'm not going to disclose my leader vote in public.
I think the better phrasing for the original question would be:
List reasons why the other candidates would
Hello,
those questions are for all candidates. By standardization I mean that
something should be used as default tool unless reasons exist to use
something else (I do not mean that we sould impose something to
everybody for all cases, but it should still be what's used in 95% of the
cases).
1/
Hi Charles,
On Donnerstag, 25. März 2010, Charles Plessy wrote:
[...] In order to make it more consensual, there is probably a
need for making concessions like shortlisting the trusted DDs according to
some criteria like [...]
What do you mean by shortlisting?
cheers,
Holger
Le Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:22:36AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
those questions are for all candidates. By standardization I mean that
something should be used as default tool unless reasons exist to use
something else (I do not mean that we sould impose something to
everybody for all
Raphael Hertzog, 2010-03-25 11:22:36 +0100 :
[...]
1/ Do you believe that it's a good move to standardize our packaging tools?
(example: debhelper is almost standard, quilt is gaining status of the
standard patch system thanks to the new source format)
Please define “standardize” here.
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:22:36AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Hello,
those questions are for all candidates. By standardization I mean that
something should be used as default tool unless reasons exist to use
something else (I do not mean that we sould impose something to
everybody for
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 09:17:44AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Dear all,
Following the ‘Membership procedures’ GR, discussion on membership
were started after the Lenny release, but eventually stopped. In this
thread it was proposed to trust DDs to nominate other members and I
found the
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org wrote:
1/ Do you believe that it's a good move to standardize our packaging tools?
(example: debhelper is almost standard, quilt is gaining status of the
standard patch system thanks to the new source format)
I do not
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:24:45AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
After the very painful GR about “Lenny and resolving DFSG violations”,
discussions started about our voting system, and the fact that it does not
accomodate well with mixture of supermajority and regular options. Also,
Hello,
First of all congrats to all candidates and thanks for stepping up
for doing this task.
Secondly, I was wondering how Debian could make it easier for people
to contribute than other (derivatives and non-derivatives)
distributions. I came up with a really nice draft howto[1] which I
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
How can we change our processes so that doing/organizing such changes
is less of a burden?
They are not.
I can't accept the premise that we can't do better at this level.
I managed to get my own project through the end (it's deployed,
On Thu Mar 25 17:38, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I don't like the underlying intuition that this entails, namely that the
GR proposer is somehow different from the other people which
contribute to the ballot preparation (e.g. seconders and proposers of
the initial and subsequent amendments).
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Margarita Manterola wrote:
4/ Organizing changes that have an impact on (a large part of|all) the
archive is very difficult:
[...]
How can we change our processes so that doing/organizing such changes
is less of a burden?
The only way is to make it easy
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org wrote:
You got me wrong. I don't want to change our processes to force people to
adopt new tools. I want to change our processes so that it's easier to
complete far-reaching projects: in my case, it includes everything from
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 06:07:19PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
How can we change our processes so that doing/organizing such changes
is less of a burden?
They are not.
I can't accept the premise that we can't do better at this
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [100325 18:18]:
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Margarita Manterola wrote:
4/ Organizing changes that have an impact on (a large part of|all) the
archive is very difficult:
[...]
How can we change our processes so that doing/organizing such changes
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 05:16:33PM +, Matthew Johnson wrote:
That not withstanding, there is still a legitimate point here. What
happens when an amendment is proposed which has different majority
requirements to the others? What happens when the secretary and the
proposer disagree about
So at the start of the week, I asked:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 05:19:20PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Bearing in mind:
* www.debian.org/social_contract says Debian's priorities are our
users and free software,
* popcon.debian.org currently reports 91,523 submissions,
*
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
A very good example of that is debhelper; nobody ever told anyone to use
it, yet most of our packages do, directly or otherwise.
Parts of Debian encourage experimentation, innovation, and evolution of
better solutions: parts don't. That debian/rules is a flexible,
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:15:45AM +0100, Serafeim Zanikolas wrote:
With respect to attracting new contributors, please ponder the idea of a
formal one-on-one mentoring scheme (as opposed to one-off interactions via
d-mentors).
I do realise that personal mentorship takes time; that's a
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 09:17:44AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
In this thread it was proposed to trust DDs to nominate other members
and I found the idea very interesting. In order to make it more
consensual, there is probably a need for making concessions like
shortlisting the trusted DDs
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:27:43 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Salut Charles,
Our users, if they want to modify, study, redistribute or use after rebuild
our
^^
system, need the source. At no moment these operations involve modifying a RFC
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:08:00 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Still, in your question you're hinting at some earlier mentoring, and I
believe that should happen in teams. [..]
That is why I like the http://www.debian.org/Teams/ page. Ideally, that
can become the welcome place for new
Hi Héctor!
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 05:55:35PM +0100, Hector Oron wrote:
First of all congrats to all candidates and thanks for stepping up
for doing this task.
Thanks! :-)
I came up with a really nice draft howto[1] which I would like to
bring up to your attention, so the basic question
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes:
In this thread it was proposed to trust DDs to nominate other members
and I found the idea very interesting. In order to make it more
consensual, there is probably a need for making concessions like
shortlisting the trusted DDs according to some
On Thu Mar 25 18:37, Neil McGovern wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 05:16:33PM +, Matthew Johnson wrote:
That not withstanding, there is still a legitimate point here. What
happens when an amendment is proposed which has different majority
requirements to the others? What happens when the
On Thu Mar 25 21:19, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
The GR we had on DAM proposal [2] has been only on the procedure which
led to the d-d-a mail. In fact, the outcome of the GR asks for
discussion+consensus (or vote), but we've never dwelled into that
afterwords.
I did try quite hard, but
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Hector Oron zu...@debian.org wrote:
Secondly, I was wondering how Debian could make it easier for people
to contribute than other (derivatives and non-derivatives)
distributions. I came up with a really nice draft howto[1] which I
would like to bring up to
Hi,
All the rebuttals have been added to the platforms now, but
they're not yet available on all the mirrors.
Kurt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
Le Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 05:55:35PM +0100, Hector Oron a écrit :
Hello,
First of all congrats to all candidates and thanks for stepping up
for doing this task.
Secondly, I was wondering how Debian could make it easier for people
to contribute than other (derivatives and
Dear Anthony,
sorry for not keeping up with the answers, this campaign is very intensive !
It is interesting that your question was a kind of mini-experiment. As a
molecular biologist, I like experiments a lot. Below is the draft that I never
sent because I did not find time to add some flesh to
32 matches
Mail list logo
