On Sat, 16 Dec 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Are you going to tell me that Debian has no way to deal with
malicious or unwilling maintainers? Note that this is the only
reason for the cdrtools dispute from Debian.
The mechanism is as I've described it previously.
The current problem is
Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Developers can retrieve the copyright information in cdrkit easily.
Users can retrieve the copyright information in cdrkit easily.
Have I forgotten someone?
You had the chance to ask me for the permission to remove this code.
Instead, you decided to
#include hallo.h
* Joerg Schilling [Sun, Dec 17 2006, 12:29:11PM]:
Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Developers can retrieve the copyright information in cdrkit easily.
Users can retrieve the copyright information in cdrkit easily.
Have I forgotten someone?
You had the chance to
You do not need to understand the background.
You just need to remember that you are not allowed to remove Copyright
information.
This is a week sence I did inform you about the Copyright violation.
Note that today, you have to either remove your project from the server or
to undo the
This one time, at band camp, Joerg Schilling said:
You do not need to understand the background.
You just need to remember that you are not allowed to remove Copyright
information.
This is a week sence I did inform you about the Copyright violation.
Note that today, you have to
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did already explain recisely what the problem is.
I've read the logs, and I still have no idea what you're talking
about.
What information do you need?
Let me spell it out the process even more clearly:
1) Send mail explaining precisely what
Peter Samuelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Joerg Schilling]
I did give an example: use what(1) on a binary compiled from the
source before and after the change to see the difference.
If you did look at the SVN, if you did have a look at the most recent
changes. it would be easy to
On Saturday 16 December 2006 12:44, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The removed text is needed in order to allow people to check the original
version information and Copyright for all relevent files using the what(1)
command.
Until this bug, I had no clue about that what(1) existed. It does also only
Sune Vuorela [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 16 December 2006 12:44, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The removed text is needed in order to allow people to check the original
version information and Copyright for all relevent files using the what(1)
command.
Until this bug, I had no clue
#include hallo.h
* Joerg Schilling [Sat, Dec 16 2006, 03:43:54PM]:
Sune Vuorela [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 16 December 2006 12:44, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The removed text is needed in order to allow people to check the original
version information and Copyright for all
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Stop abusing the Debian Bug tracking system!
First and foremost, the maintainer(s) of a Debian Package are wholy
responsible for determining the state of bugs assigned to their
packages in the BTS unless
[Joerg Schilling]
I did give an example: use what(1) on a binary compiled from the
source before and after the change to see the difference.
If you did look at the SVN, if you did have a look at the most recent
changes. it would be easy to understand what happened.
We have removed a
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First and foremost, the maintainer(s) of a Debian Package are
wholy responsible for determining the state of bugs assigned to
their packages in the BTS unless overridden by the tech-ctte.
If they did act
#include hallo.h
*Joerg Schilling [Sun, Dec 10 2006, 10:38:15PM]:
First, sccsids are unused code. They have been removed for technical
reasons, and because no usual user and no regular program seem to use
them (see below). And they are disturbing the QA work by triggering
compiler warnings. But
14 matches
Mail list logo
