Matthias Urlichs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you actively take on some responsibility and then fail to actually
fulfill that responsibility it and/or fail to tell others that somebody
else needs to do the job, that _is_ to actively work against these rules
and decisions in my book.
No.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ok, you say it has, but please provide some prove or at least
argumentation of it, and the benefit it will bring, over the imagined
benefit you believe in. And you haven't responded to the fact that this
will make no difference to those users who think
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 11:47:16AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
And believing
that ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free is part of Debian seems to be
quite common,
That's because it's true. That directory is part of a service provided
by the
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
There _is_ a change: one day we're distributing non-free, the next,
we're not. That's the important change. It's not a change of policy,
certainly, it's instead a claim that the *existing* policy does *not*
need to be changed to meet the concern
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't see how _my_ failure to communicate with exactitude, and taking
shortcuts, does in any way support your argumentation. It is not a
unclarity of my thoughts and feeling, just a failure to bring this
clearly into words. And you choose to attack me
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I guess Raul is right, and that the non-free removal GR should indeed
propose a rationale saying exactly why it is a good idea.
Hogwash. There is no need for everyone who votes for it to agree on a
^^^
Please refrain from using
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But you are interfering by the time i should spend on things, in
particular making it more difficult for me to maintain my non-free
package ? A strange way of not interfering with my volunteer time.
It is not Debian's job to help you with everything in
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, from my understanding, hogwash would be the washing water of a
pork, or something such.
When you don't know a word, look it up. This is so basic.
The main point is that i don't master the subtelties of the english
language enough to clearly
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But when i was accepted in the debian project, the social contract
clearly said that if i wanted to package non-free packages, they would
be distributed by the debian infrastructure. This is a promise the
project made to me, as i made the promise to agree
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However there is no reason why a third-party non-free.org would feel
compelled to limit themselves to our keyring and our policy. They might
well accept help from anyone who volunteers, but would they have an NM
process equivalent to ours? No reason
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 02:37:34PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
It is not Debian's job to help you with everything in your life that
you want to volunteer for. Debian has a purpose, and I seek to
clarify what that purpose is.
Its
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 09:24:02PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven implied that there is a time for removing non-free, but that this
isn't it. You are saying that any time a maintainer wants to put a
non-free package on the Debian server
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1. Bug tracking though bugs.debian.org;
2. Developers vetted and a GPG trust path guaranteed through
the new maintainer process;
3. Non-free packages must meet same Debian policy as free packages,
Some here claim that #1 is trivial to replicate.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The response is easy: it won't have our name on it anymore, and we
won't be devoting our resources to its support.
Which ressources ? Assuredly not the small time the ftp-masters pass on
it ? Assuredly not the minimal bandwidth requirement ?
You
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One of the main argument, used by Branden if i remember well, was that
removing non-free from the debian infrastructure would force authors of
non-free packages to revise their licence, or users to consider
alternatives.
Exactly in what way does this
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But if you would have read the rest of my post, or my other mails, you
would know that i advocate a case by case schedule for this to happen.
I don't understand. I'm asking when is it appropriate to shut down
support for the non-free archive on Debian.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I will most assuredly consider doing that. And i maintain one of the
most non-free packages that can be. One of the seven or so binary-only
kernel modules, which is a thing _i_ consider evil, and a threat to all
what debian represents in the long run. And
Peter Samuelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think it is more than reasonable to entertain the possibility that a
similar cause is, in the present case, responsible for a similar
result. And even to take action based on that assumption. Or do you
always wait for perfect information before
Peter Samuelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That may be true. However, you may have overlooked Erinn Clark's post
to this thread, which, fortuitously, has just the sort of information
you seem to be asking for.
By no means would I ever say that the evidence isn't forthcoming.
I've seen it
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yeah, failing arguments, you play with words, how usual of this thread.
Huh? No, I said what the changes would be, and they are very
important changes to me. They are not important to you perhaps, but
it is true that they are important to me.
And it is
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So that does mean, that this argument is not one you (and Mj Ray) think
are the reason for moving non-free out of the debian archive ?
It might or might not happen that way. I believe that non-free should
be removed from Debian regardless. I've told you
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do you really believe having a non-free archive on the debian
infrastructure is in any way different than having a separate
non-free.org archive?
Yes. How many times do I have to answer this question? Yes, it's
different.
What does it change in the
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You can't argue for a change by saying that the current system's no good
because it's the current system.
I didn't say that, but apparently the thread has been lost. Sven
sounded like he was saying that at some point it would be the right
time to
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How come the keep non-free advocates seem to have to do everything?
They don't. This is Debian. Nobody has to do anything.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
yes, bullying happens too. but meekness happens whether there is any actual
bullying or not.
Meekness isn't harmful, nor does it ever justify your bullying.
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 09:24:02PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven implied that there is a time for removing non-free, but that this
isn't it. You are saying that any time a maintainer wants to put a
non-free package on the Debian
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1. Bug tracking though bugs.debian.org;
2. Developers vetted and a GPG trust path guaranteed through
the new maintainer process;
3. Non-free packages must meet same Debian policy as free packages,
Some here claim that #1 is trivial to replicate.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The response is easy: it won't have our name on it anymore, and we
won't be devoting our resources to its support.
Which ressources ? Assuredly not the small time the ftp-masters pass on
it ? Assuredly not the minimal bandwidth requirement ?
You
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But if you would have read the rest of my post, or my other mails, you
would know that i advocate a case by case schedule for this to happen.
I don't understand. I'm asking when is it appropriate to shut down
support for the non-free archive on Debian.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I will most assuredly consider doing that. And i maintain one of the
most non-free packages that can be. One of the seven or so binary-only
kernel modules, which is a thing _i_ consider evil, and a threat to all
what debian represents in the long run. And
Peter Samuelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That may be true. However, you may have overlooked Erinn Clark's post
to this thread, which, fortuitously, has just the sort of information
you seem to be asking for.
By no means would I ever say that the evidence isn't forthcoming.
I've seen it
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yeah, failing arguments, you play with words, how usual of this thread.
Huh? No, I said what the changes would be, and they are very
important changes to me. They are not important to you perhaps, but
it is true that they are important to me.
And it is
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So that does mean, that this argument is not one you (and Mj Ray) think
are the reason for moving non-free out of the debian archive ?
It might or might not happen that way. I believe that non-free should
be removed from Debian regardless. I've told you
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do you really believe having a non-free archive on the debian
infrastructure is in any way different than having a separate
non-free.org archive?
Yes. How many times do I have to answer this question? Yes, it's
different.
What does it change in the
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
You can't argue for a change by saying that the current system's no good
because it's the current system.
I didn't say that, but apparently the thread has been lost. Sven
sounded like he was saying that at some point it would be the right
time to
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
How come the keep non-free advocates seem to have to do everything?
They don't. This is Debian. Nobody has to do anything.
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
yes, bullying happens too. but meekness happens whether there is any actual
bullying or not.
Meekness isn't harmful, nor does it ever justify your bullying.
Thomas
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 11:25:59AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, Helen is kind enough to summarise her views on why she doesn't
participate in the project as fully as she might, and she's called
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Quite. But you too are ignoring one detail: that behavioral
trait is expressed preferentially in one gender; perhaps due to
cultural indoctrination, perhaps due to inherent biology.
I have no idea if this is true. Moreover, I don't think it
David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 07:58:03PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
The plural of anecdote is not data.
True, but then what would you suggest as an alternative means of
gathering data? Should we stick the users in a set of test tubes,
complete with
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think she is guessing. Indeed, the men here have done
exactly what she thought they would -- calling her a flake,
mentally unstable, inexperieiced, and sexist.
See, this wasn't the men. It was particular people. It was not a
gender
Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) That debian contains bullying or aggressive elements. She is *not*
inventing this, she did *not* come into the discussion with this as a
stereotype that she's trying to fit debian into. It's quite clearly
observable.
This part I agree about.
2)
Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
FWIW, I wasn't aware of such a subculture when I joined back in 2001,
and even now I'm finding it hard to think of more than a couple of other
lesbian/gay/bi DDs.
There's Me! But of course, how can we know that there are lots of
gay and bi people in
Helen Faulkner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Partly it's knowing that I'm going to be dealing
with a man (almost certainly), and he may assume I don't know what I'm
doing, and he may put me down or be condescending or unkind as a
result.
Are you assuming that all men will do this? The men who
Helen Faulkner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It doesn't take many idiots in the community to put your average
interested woman off, if we're going to have to deal with that kind
of attitude. And you wonder why there are few female debian
developers?!
I'm one of those weirdos who has never met
Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The problem Helen refers to in the most part is not *overt* sexism. The
problem is *subliminal/covert* sexism, where everyone is treated the
same way but women in general (through social training, upbringing,
whatever) are less well adapted to such
Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The question to which Helen was initially responding was not why should
we change the environment?. It was why are there so few women in
debian?.
Fair enough.
If there are grander reasons for changing the environment then that's
wonderful, but I
Helen Faulkner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
People who haven't already, could learn from reading:
http://www.linux.org/docs/ldp/howto/Encourage-Women-Linux-HOWTO/index.html
especially the section about the problems women face in approaching
linux communities.
Mmm, very good HOWTO indeed.
--
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, as you all know i have upto now be mostly a proponent of the keep
non-free camp, because, altough i fully would prefer every software in
debian to be free, i feel that this is not really yet the time for it.
Ah, so there is a time for it? Can you
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would be really interested in your response to the part of my post you
silently skipped, namely :
Sure, but please tell me, if we are going to move non-free stuff to
non-free.org, exactly how will that change anything over the current
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And more to the point, what would be the benefit to debian and the
free/open/whatever community, since the main point is that these
non-free packages are evil ?
No, the main point is that non-free software is not part of Debian,
and Debian's job isn't to
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 06:08:33PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, as you all know i have upto now be mostly a proponent of the keep
non-free camp, because, altough i fully would prefer every software
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 11:25:59AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
So, Helen is kind enough to summarise her views on why she doesn't
participate in the project as fully as she might, and she's
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Quite. But you too are ignoring one detail: that behavioral
trait is expressed preferentially in one gender; perhaps due to
cultural indoctrination, perhaps due to inherent biology.
I have no idea if this is true. Moreover, I don't think it
David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 07:58:03PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
The plural of anecdote is not data.
True, but then what would you suggest as an alternative means of
gathering data? Should we stick the users in a set of test tubes,
complete with
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think she is guessing. Indeed, the men here have done
exactly what she thought they would -- calling her a flake,
mentally unstable, inexperieiced, and sexist.
See, this wasn't the men. It was particular people. It was not a
gender
Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) That debian contains bullying or aggressive elements. She is *not*
inventing this, she did *not* come into the discussion with this as a
stereotype that she's trying to fit debian into. It's quite clearly
observable.
This part I agree about.
2)
Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
FWIW, I wasn't aware of such a subculture when I joined back in 2001,
and even now I'm finding it hard to think of more than a couple of other
lesbian/gay/bi DDs.
There's Me! But of course, how can we know that there are lots of
gay and bi people in
Helen Faulkner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Partly it's knowing that I'm going to be dealing
with a man (almost certainly), and he may assume I don't know what I'm
doing, and he may put me down or be condescending or unkind as a
result.
Are you assuming that all men will do this? The men who
Helen Faulkner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It doesn't take many idiots in the community to put your average
interested woman off, if we're going to have to deal with that kind
of attitude. And you wonder why there are few female debian
developers?!
I'm one of those weirdos who has never met
Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The problem Helen refers to in the most part is not *overt* sexism. The
problem is *subliminal/covert* sexism, where everyone is treated the
same way but women in general (through social training, upbringing,
whatever) are less well adapted to such
Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The question to which Helen was initially responding was not why should
we change the environment?. It was why are there so few women in
debian?.
Fair enough.
If there are grander reasons for changing the environment then that's
wonderful, but I
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would be really interested in your response to the part of my post you
silently skipped, namely :
Sure, but please tell me, if we are going to move non-free stuff to
non-free.org, exactly how will that change anything over the current
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 06:08:33PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, as you all know i have upto now be mostly a proponent of the keep
non-free camp, because, altough i fully would prefer every
Mike Beattie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We're a previously persecuted minority, dammit, treat us special, we
deserve the land you have worked hard for. even though we sit on our asses.
New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the United States all have some
similarity vis-a-vis native populations.
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, Helen is kind enough to summarise her views on why she doesn't
participate in the project as fully as she might, and she's called a
flake, mentally unstable and sexist for her beliefs.
Well, she said that she doesn't participate because boys will be
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 06:59:57PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
I think there's something sexist there--not in you, but in her. If
there is any truth to the notion that men are better at being bullied,
then I think it is only because men get
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 12:44:22PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
As I said, if there is any truth to the notion that men are better at
being bullied. I suspect there is not really much truth to that.
Either men are better at being bullied
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 01:10:08PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Helen said women are likely to be not so confident that their skills
will allow them to survive in an environment like debian, compared to
their male counterparts. And then, her
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
dark hysterical is actually an interesting word, it basically
means having a womb. Psychologists once thought it was something
women did naturally.
Sort of. They thought it was something that happened to women, and
not men, and was
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 06:59:57PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
I think there's something sexist there--not in you, but in her. If
there is any truth to the notion that men are better at being bullied,
then I think it is only because men get
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 12:44:22PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
As I said, if there is any truth to the notion that men are better at
being bullied. I suspect there is not really much truth to that.
Either men are better at being bullied
Ben Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
people will bully her because she's female. She simply fears that
people will bully her (as they bully others, male or female), and her
claim is that males (by social training or otherwise) are better suited to
such environments than females are.
I think
Mike Beattie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't honestly give a rats ass about what sexuality a person is, but I get
seriously pissed off when the 'We're a minority, we're special' card gets
pulled. It's the whole PC thing going overboard.
Since nobody in my opinion has ever said that...what
A. What do you think is the greatest challenge facing Debian in the
coming year? What would you do as Project Leader to try and meet this
challenge?
B. What should the Project Leader's role be when Debian comes into
significant and important conflict with other free software
organizations? (As
Mike Beattie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't honestly give a rats ass about what sexuality a person is, but I get
seriously pissed off when the 'We're a minority, we're special' card gets
pulled. It's the whole PC thing going overboard.
Since nobody in my opinion has ever said that...what
A. What do you think is the greatest challenge facing Debian in the
coming year? What would you do as Project Leader to try and meet this
challenge?
B. What should the Project Leader's role be when Debian comes into
significant and important conflict with other free software
organizations? (As
Falk Hueffner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have no problem with that content. I dislike reading rants, though.
Actually, I would like to hear how the candidates deal with a rant.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Falk Hueffner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have no problem with that content. I dislike reading rants, though.
Actually, I would like to hear how the candidates deal with a rant.
Richard Braakman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Looking up Frank, we find A pigsty as the first definition.
Slightly surprising, but maybe it's a comment on the project's
current lack of organization. More likely, the definition we
want is further down: unbounded by restrictions, limitations,
Debian Project Secretary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But the Key rings contain keys of people who have left the
project, and several people, myself included, have two keys, and it
is not easy to determine the total number of developers.
May I suggest that one of the Project Secretary's
Debian Project Secretary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But the Key rings contain keys of people who have left the
project, and several people, myself included, have two keys, and it
is not easy to determine the total number of developers.
May I suggest that one of the Project Secretary's
Norbert Veber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thats very strange. So if I only consider one candidate vorthy of a
vote, and fill in just one square, my vote means nothing? That dosent
seem right :)
If that's what you think, then you rank them thus:
1) Your candidate
2) None of the above
3 and 4)
Will someone have the official job of capturing a transcript of the
IRC debate and posting it to debian-vote?
I would appreciate it if those running for DPL could answer the
following:
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?
2) Do you believe
Michael Koehne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Moin Thomas Bushnell,
I would appreciate it if those running for DPL could answer the
following:
*hm* i dont think that this topic should be done on personal level
between the DPL. Its to important for that. Placing crypto in main
would
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think any of the DPL candidates should answer the questions
until the campaigning period commencements. We're still in the
nomination period for another dozen hours or so.
Fine by me. I'm interested in what the candidates think before the
Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
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
Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Crypto in main is already being moved forward. It will probably be in
working condition by the time a new DPL takes office. I'd go for some
better more forward-looking questions.
I'm worried by the discussion on debian-legal. Some people are
raising
Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Given that I'm not a candidate, I don't think I helped you much. :) Just
trust that crypto-in-main is a done deal all on it's own at some point
in the near future, thanks in no part to myself (other than providing a
medium for the discussions and work).
I would appreciate it if those running for DPL could answer the
following:
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?
2) Do you believe
Michael Koehne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Moin Thomas Bushnell,
I would appreciate it if those running for DPL could answer the
following:
*hm* i dont think that this topic should be done on personal level
between the DPL. Its to important for that. Placing crypto in main
would
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think any of the DPL candidates should answer the questions
until the campaigning period commencements. We're still in the
nomination period for another dozen hours or so.
Fine by me. I'm interested in what the candidates think before the
Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
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
Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Crypto in main is already being moved forward. It will probably be in
working condition by the time a new DPL takes office. I'd go for some
better more forward-looking questions.
I'm worried by the discussion on debian-legal. Some people are
raising what
Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Legal FUD is not going to stop the momentum we already have. Almost all
of our ducks are in a row already. Two high profile lawyers (SPI's and
HP's) have already looked over the proposals for implementing things,
made suggestions on how to procede, and
Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Given that I'm not a candidate, I don't think I helped you much. :) Just
trust that crypto-in-main is a done deal all on it's own at some point
in the near future, thanks in no part to myself (other than providing a
medium for the discussions and work). A
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
He continues to assert on debian-devel that he should have the right to
send unsolicited, automatic mails with a default policy of having every
maintainer subscribed to his list.
How about if instead of this, he sent automated entries to the BTS?
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I propose that Michael Bramer be ordered to stop sending automated mails
to other developers (regarding the DDTS or any other subject).
If he does not comply within 24 hours of ratification of this proposal,
he will be expelled from the Debian
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
He continues to assert on debian-devel that he should have the right to
send unsolicited, automatic mails with a default policy of having every
maintainer subscribed to his list.
How about if instead of this, he sent automated entries to the BTS?
601 - 700 of 793 matches
Mail list logo
