* Matthew Palmer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030424 02:50]:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Andreas Barth wrote:
Can't you understand that as an author you would like that messages
like this are not removed without your consent? The internet
robustness principle says: Be liberal in what you accept and
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030424 05:20]:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:41:58 +0200, Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
You can. The _moral_ right is compatible with free software, the
_formal_ right not. (And in some, rare cases the moral right is
ignored. mkreiserfs could be a
* David Nusinow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030424 11:20]:
Your message works both
ways, and it's obvious to me that upstream authors should give
maintainers as much respect as maintainers give them. Some simple
civility is really all that's called for.
Perfectly true. But this list is called
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 12:25:53 +1000, mbp [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On 24 Apr 2003, Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:17, Martin Pool wrote:
The conventional way to get in touch with the developers of a
free software project to raise an issue is to write to the
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 21:43:24 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:46:32 +1000, Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:53:14 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I was intentionally using moderate language because (a) I don't
believe it is strictly plagiarism (as
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 14:04:00 +1000, Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 21:43:24 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:46:32 +1000, Martin Pool
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:53:14 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: I was
intentionally using
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 11:44:22PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
--
Lesser artists borrow, great artists steal. Igor Stravinsky
(-:
Le jeu 24/04/2003 à 05:37, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
I agree. I am not trying to defend Hans's diplomatic skills.
Diplomatic skill? It is not a feat of extraordinary diplomacy
not to accuse your correspondent of various acts theft and piracy
while initiating a dialogue. Has common
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 05:39:25PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Can't you understand that as an author you would like that messages
like this are not removed without your consent? The internet
robustness principle says: Be liberal in what you accept and
conservative in what you send. Modifiying
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 11:17:16AM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
Imagine you are the developer of some random piece of free software. You
don't necessarily use Debian; you certainly don't understand all its
systems and protocols.
The conventional way to get in touch with the developers of a
Il gio, 2003-04-24 alle 21:07, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
A Debian maintainer should not be a stranger to the upstream maintainer.
Your (active) upstreams should _already_ know who you are and that you are
responsible for the Debian packaging of their software. The one thing that
they need to know
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 11:02:02PM +0200, Andrea Capriotti wrote:
A big part of your job as Debian maintainer will be to stay in contact
with the upstream developers...
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch-developer-duties.en.html#s-upstream-coordination
I thought that
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 09:58:08AM -0600, Ed Boraas wrote:
Hello, all.
Ideally, I think, including the verbatim message in a separate file
(SPONSORS?) and including a reference to that file in mkreiserfs'
output should serve as an acceptable balance. I'm willing to reconsider
that
Adam Majer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having a one or two liner message
during startup of a command line utility is fine by me. Having
5 pages of stuff is not fair to the user. Period.
The job of a maintaier is to make the software as usable to a user
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 08:59:42PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
Repetitive, largely useless to the user messages like those should
be removed and put in a file like SPONSORS or whatever. I would
NOT use any program that is going to spew out poinless stuff
when I do not want to see it.
one could
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 04:44:58AM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
Repetitive, largely useless to the user messages like those should
be removed and put in a file like SPONSORS or whatever. I would
NOT use any program that is going to spew out poinless stuff
when I do not want to see it.
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 04:44:58AM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 08:59:42PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
Repetitive, largely useless to the user messages like those should
be removed and put in a file like SPONSORS or whatever. I would
NOT use any program that is going
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 05:53:14PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:59:59 +1000, Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
For example, at least two people called Hans a troll. An upstream
author expressing concern about the way their code is packaged is
not trolling (i.e.
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 15:10:57 +1000, Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au
said:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 05:53:14PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:59:59 +1000, Martin Pool
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
For example, at least two people called Hans a troll. An
upstream
On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 10:34:14PM -0700, David Nusinow wrote:
You're forgetting that we don't really know what Reiser's intentions
are. His complaints don't address anything specific, but instead throw
out terms like plagiarism and bowdlerization in order to avoid listing
specific complaints.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 09:41:34AM +0100, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
If the copyright holder includes a copy of the GPL but writes that the
software is licensed under the GPL plus additional restrictions, then
this is not illegal as far as I know (there's nothing in the GPL
that prevents it
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 02:53:38PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
Some people here apparently delight in pissing off upstream authors
who object to the way their software is modified. There are plenty of
posts saying that Debian can do what it likes, and precious few
acknowledging that Hans ought
Ed has graciously agreed to restore the credits, and I thank Debian for
its respect for the wishes of the original author in regards to
prominently crediting those who have contributed.
--
Hans
On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 11:17, Hans Reiser wrote:
Ed has graciously agreed to restore the credits, and I thank Debian for
its respect for the wishes of the original author in regards to
prominently crediting those who have contributed.
I'm very happy to hear that this has been resolved
* Glenn Maynard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030422 05:50]:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 12:25:39PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
banner at startup is inconvenient. However just cutting it out is not
a good way to resolve the bug. The maintainer made a mistake here.
It ought to be obvious that removing a
* David Nusinow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030422 08:05]:
So, ultimately, what harm does this do to the author? If all he cares
about is his reputation, then he's certaintly not doing a good job of
bolstering it in this particular forum. He's not representing his
sponsors very well either.
Can't
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030422 08:35]:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 02:53:38PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
Authors have a moral right (and a legal one in some places) not to
have their work mutilated.
You can assert a moral right to control how your work is used, or you
can write
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 05:35:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
I object: There is always a cause why a certain message is output. A
debian maintainer should (morally) at least ask what the upstream
maintainer thinks about removing the sponsorship message and remove it
against the will of the
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Brian May wrote:
Quoting README, in particular the entire LICENSING section:
[Snip text about Hans Reiser assuming the right to re-license contributed
work if it's not clearly labelled otherwise. I don't have an opinion on
the legality of it, but it doesn't sound
[Some dude called Manoj (I think) did produce such utterances recently]
You may be enured to unsubstantiated accusations of
plagiarism, theft, idiocy, and worse, but please allow me the right of
umbrage at such.
I apologise for accusing Manoj of having a prune up his rear. It's clear to
me
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Hans Reiser wrote:
Ed has graciously agreed to restore the credits, and I thank Debian for
its respect for the wishes of the original author in regards to
prominently crediting those who have contributed.
Again, what does Debian(as a community/organization) have to do
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 10:49:09AM -0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
That said, I'd prefer Debian NOT remove such advertising, only that we
guarantee users the right to do.
*And* distribute the result, if you want to be DFSG-free.
Cheers,
Emile.
--
E-Advies - Emile van Bergen [EMAIL
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Andreas Barth wrote:
Can't you understand that as an author you would like that messages
like this are not removed without your consent? The internet
robustness principle says: Be liberal in what you accept and
conservative in what you send. Modifiying code is sending,
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 07:27:05PM +0100, Matt Ryan wrote:
I apologise for accusing Manoj of having a prune up his rear. It's clear to
me now that this was a disservice to prunes and in fact it's a thesaurus
thats lodged there and is giving him delusions of having a large vocabulary.
At this
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 15:10:45 -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Hans Reiser wrote:
Ed has graciously agreed to restore the credits, and I thank Debian for
its respect for the wishes of the original author in regards to
prominently crediting those who have contributed.
I'm glad to
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:53:14 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:59:59 +1000, Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
For example, at least two people called Hans a troll. An upstream
author expressing concern about the way their code is packaged is
not trolling (i.e. making
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, Martin Pool wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 15:10:45 -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Hans Reiser wrote:
Ed has graciously agreed to restore the credits, and I thank Debian for
its respect for the wishes of the original author in regards to
prominently
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:17, Martin Pool wrote:
The conventional way to get in touch with the developers of a free
software project to raise an issue is to write to the -devel list. It's
not surprising that this is what people do with debian.
The conventional way to approach a large group of
On 24 Apr 2003, Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:17, Martin Pool wrote:
The conventional way to get in touch with the developers of a free
software project to raise an issue is to write to the -devel list. It's
not surprising that this is what people do with
On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:41:58 +0200, Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030422 08:35]:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 02:53:38PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
Authors have a moral right (and a legal one in some places) not
to have their work mutilated.
You
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:46:32 +1000, Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:53:14 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:59:59 +1000, Martin Pool
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
For example, at least two people called Hans a troll. An upstream
author expressing
On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 23:22:36 -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 12:25:39PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
We don't care what the author wants, we have the legal right to
change what we like is not a good message to send. Even if you don't
Thankfully, Debian isn't sending this
On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 00:53, Martin Pool wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 23:22:36 -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 12:25:39PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
We don't care what the author wants, we have the legal right to
change what we like is not a good message to send. Even if
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 02:53:38PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
Debian should not stomp all over the author's intentions if it is
reasonably avoidable. The alternatives do not seem to have been
adequately explored.
You're forgetting that we don't really know what Reiser's intentions
are. His
I say it ought to be obvious, because Hans put the message in there
intending it to be prominent, rather than (say) putting it in a doc
file. It is reasonable to assume that he cared about putting this
message in front of everyone who used it. If you can't understand why
removing it would annoy
On 22 Apr 2003, Michael Tindal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Authors have a moral right (and a legal one in some places) not to
have their work mutilated.
I do not consider removing 20-something lines of output from a
program whose purpose is to create a filesystem mutilating it. By
On Saturday 19 April 2003 20:32, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
b) The licensing information certainly ist misleading: The first line says
GPL 2, period. Then there's lengthy information for assigning copyright
of patches. After that, there is that funny nothing ... shall be
interpreted to
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 02:53:38PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 23:22:36 -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 12:25:39PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
We don't care what the author wants, we have the legal right to
change what we like is not a good message to
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 01:19:17AM -0400, Michael Tindal wrote:
I do not understand your accusations here. No one stated what you said,
and no one has delibaretly attempted to upset Hans. Quite the contrary,
actually. I have seen _several_ people attempting to find a compromise,
Indeed. I
I guess if Reiser doesn't want an fsck/mkreiserfs without
his beloved credits message, it's time to dump reiserfs from Debian and
switch to ext3/XFS/whatever.
Please don't. I'm running reiserfs on most of my home system's disks and have
been *very* happy with it (..and don't even have the
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 01:04:56AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
You can assert a moral right to control how your work is used, or you
can write Free Software. You don't get to do both at once. If Hans
wants to assert his moral rights, we will certainly respect that; as
I've said, many Debian
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 03:53:17PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
Note that reiserfsprogs-3.6.4-4.diff has in fact not moved the credits
to another file, but *removed them entirely*. The sponsors of the
program are not mentioned at all in the Debian package. This is
unconscionable.
You seem to
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 07:54:26AM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
wrote:
Well, doesn't the GPL say something on it being illegal to impose additional
restrictions on distribution?
If the restriction is agreed upon by all copyright holders, then the issue
is murky; as far as I
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 01:19:17AM -0400, Michael Tindal wrote:
Prominently does not necessarily imply causing the program to be
unusable. A one line message stating This program was funded my
multiple sources; see the file CREDITS would suffice.
Debian should not stomp all over the
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 02:09:39 -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 01:19:17AM -0400, Michael Tindal wrote:
I do not understand your accusations here. No one stated what you
said, and no one has delibaretly attempted to upset Hans. Quite the
contrary, actually. I have seen
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 08:58:05AM +0200, Lars Bahner wrote:
Maybe someone with a little knowledge of C could add a -q --quiet
parameter to the debian source?
This doesn't help the more major problems that have been raised
(licensing and DFSG-freeness) at all.
--
Glenn Maynard
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 04:59:59PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
For example, at least two people called Hans a troll. An upstream author
expressing concern about the way their code is packaged is not trolling
(i.e. making random arguments just to provoke flames.)
He went from accusing Debian of
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Well, doesn't the GPL say something on it being illegal to impose
additional
restrictions on distribution?
If the restriction is agreed upon by all copyright holders, then the issue
is murky; as far as I know, there's no consensus on this issue on
On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 06:19:28PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
Remember, the issue here isn't whether there's good reason to remove the
Reiser message, but whether we're allowed to (apparently not) and
whether not being allowed to do so is DFSG-free. Even if we were happy
with simply putting
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 03:19:56AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 08:58:05AM +0200, Lars Bahner wrote:
Maybe someone with a little knowledge of C could add a -q --quiet
parameter to the debian source?
This doesn't help the more major problems that have been raised
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 10:43:44AM +0200, Jan Niehusmann wrote:
Are you sure about that? I didn't read all the messages in this thread,
I'm not sure about anything, as Hans hasn't clarified what he's complaining
about.
I think debian should respect the authors' wishes, even if we would be
Did you start a new thread on purpose? If not: please use a sensible mail
program. Also, please use proper attribution lines when replying to mail.
On Tuesday 22 April 2003 08:31, Jarno Elonen wrote:
Just because one small feature of a magnificent piece of software is
slightly annoying,
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 02:51:11AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
You seem to be equating author credits with sponsorship credits, as if
removing sponsorship credits is on a level with, say, removing copyright
notices and the author's name.
Who says it isn't? If you want to dedicate a program
Eric Schwartz writes:
Except in extreme cases, we don't overrule a package maintainer's
decision to package the software he maintains however he likes. I don't
see any indication he has tried unsuccessfully to air his concerns with
the maintainer
I think this is because like most people he
Adrian writes:
Well, doesn't the GPL say something on it being illegal to impose
additional restrictions on distribution?
Original authors can add external restrictions, though the result is
generally incompatible with other GPL software.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing
David Nusinow wrote:
Honestly, how bad is removing this message? Is removing this really
plagiarism? No, as credits will be given as due in the credits file.
Right. Plagiarism would be replacing the credits with other credits,
claiming to have written someone else's work. That word has no
Martin Pool wrote:
For example, at least two people called Hans a troll. An upstream author
expressing concern about the way their code is packaged is not trolling
(i.e. making random arguments just to provoke flames.)
Considering that Reiser waved his arms frantically but said nothing of
Jan writes:
He did talk about 'violation of copyright' in his first mail, but reading
his second mail, I'm quite sure he doesn't really care about legal
positions, but about fairness.
But Debian _has_ to care about legal positions. Mr. Reiser has published
a statement which appears to accuse
Craig writes:
I think the accusation of trolling holds up quite well.
It's still better to let the reader work it out for himself.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
Hello, all.
I've only just returned from spending the long weekend out of town. Of
course, I've awoken to find a rather large thread on debian-devel
regarding attribution issues with my packages of reiserfsprogs. You can
imagine my excitement :)
As a result, I've privately emailed Hans to try
En réponse à Chris Cheney [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm sure all the FSF/Debian folks would be thrilled if someone changed
the
code in [x]emacs to not output anything about the GPL at startup, or
if vim
didn't include any info about helping Ugandan orphans.
First of all emacs is pure bloat so
Ed Boraas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For instance, if Hans insists on retaining the complete sponsorship
message verbatim, how strongly would you, as users of the package,
feel about the issue?
I don't think such a mandate can exist in free software; it certainly
isn't GPL-compatible. On the
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 06:47:23AM -0700, Craig Dickson wrote:
Martin Pool wrote:
For example, at least two people called Hans a troll. An upstream author
expressing concern about the way their code is packaged is not trolling
(i.e. making random arguments just to provoke flames.)
I note that few people are cc'ing Hans Reiser on things they seem to
expect him to respond to; is everybody assuming that he's subscribed to
debian-devel?
Anyway, now that Ed has come back, let us just wait for him to clarify the
issue with Hans (and/or continue the *license* debate in
Colin Watson wrote:
I note that few people are cc'ing Hans Reiser on things they seem to
expect him to respond to; is everybody assuming that he's subscribed to
debian-devel?
If he sends mail to debian-devel, it's nobody's fault but his if he
never sees the replies. I didn't see any
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 05:28:16AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 10:43:44AM +0200, Jan Niehusmann wrote:
Are you sure about that? I didn't read all the messages in this thread,
I'm not sure about anything, as Hans hasn't clarified what he's complaining
about.
It's
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 09:50:47PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Hans obviously feels the contributions his sponsors played in getting
reiserfs written and maintained was very important. Why do you think
you know better?
I fully agree with following the author's wishes in things like this; I
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 09:58:08AM -0600, Ed Boraas wrote:
As a result, I've privately emailed Hans to try to resolve the issue. I
would like to apologize to debian-devel for the traffic this has
generated over the past few days.
Thanks. Could you perhaps share with us whether you were
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:59:59 +1000, Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
For example, at least two people called Hans a troll. An upstream
author expressing concern about the way their code is packaged is
not trolling (i.e. making random arguments just to provoke flames.)
I find it
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 07:54:26 +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von
Bidder [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
As a user of reiserfs: the long messages are really just
annoying. the name of authors and sponsors is not something that I
am interested in when running the program, this applies to programs
On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 13:57, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 09:58:08AM -0600, Ed Boraas wrote:
As a result, I've privately emailed Hans to try to resolve the issue. I
would like to apologize to debian-devel for the traffic this has
generated over the past few days.
In chiark.mail.debian.devel, Hans Reiser wrote:
Feel free to make the credits more CPU efficient, reformat them to fit a
screen, animate them, anything that adheres to the academic attribution
spirit of respecting those who contributed years of their lives at the
cost of substantial reductions
On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 06:54:42AM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote:
It is really a question of, do you respect the authors?
Who do you respect, Hans? Many Debian Developers are also Free Software
authors. How much respect are you showing us with your brazen
accusations of impropriety? Did it occur
On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Hans Reiser wrote:
Feel free to make the credits more CPU efficient, reformat them to fit a
screen, animate them, anything that adheres to the academic attribution
spirit of respecting those who contributed years of their lives at the
cost of substantial reductions in
What if the full statment was shown once on installation, but not every
time the program is used, would that be an acceptable compromise to you ?
Glenn
On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 02:34:25PM +1000, Glenn McGrath wrote:
What if the full statment was shown once on installation, but not every
time the program is used, would that be an acceptable compromise to you ?
Again: this is the least of the problems; more important is 1: what are
the real
Glenn McGrath wrote:
What if the full statment was shown once on installation, but not every
time the program is used, would that be an acceptable compromise to you ?
Glenn
Maybe, but not very many people run mkreiserfs frequently. For most
users, mkreiserfs is performed once on
On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 09:40:50AM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote:
Maybe, but not very many people run mkreiserfs frequently. For most
users, mkreiserfs is performed once on installation, or close enough to
not matter a lot.
What about the fact that most installers don't even show the output of
Hello!
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 03:05:16PM -0400, Travis Crump wrote:
You mean a bug report like
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=152547? Oh, wait...
What if someone wanted to write a gtk frontend to mkreiserfs? The
Last time we spoke with EVMS folks about this kind of
On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 04:41:43AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
This code partially funded by DARPA, SuSE, MP3.com, bigstorage.com
and others
would be entirely acceptable to you?
What about:
This code partially funded by DARPA, SuSE, MP3.com, bigstorage.com
and others.
Oleg Drokin wrote:
Hello!
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 03:05:16PM -0400, Travis Crump wrote:
You mean a bug report like
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=152547? Oh, wait...
What if someone wanted to write a gtk frontend to mkreiserfs? The
Last time we spoke with EVMS folks
The difficulty of their character unfortunately often seems to correlate
with
the important of their software. ;) So even if the upstreams sometimes
heats
up easily, please spend extra patience on them for the sake of the users.
Pretty please.. I'd really hate to lose something like Reiserfs
On Sunday 20 April 2003 22:30, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
If the upstream author is rude to me, he does not deserve any
consideration from myself. If he chooses to alienate his clientele,
he should expect to reap what he sowed.
Buit, this doesn't get any problems solved. Using 'an
It's also worth considering that perhaps there is a language difference
(does Hans have English as a first language?) that make it seem that the
email seem harsher than it really is. Many Europeans are naturally very
honest with what they say and at first this comes across as been rude/blunt
On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 11:14:05AM +0100, Matt Ryan wrote:
It's also worth considering that perhaps there is a language difference
(does Hans have English as a first language?) that make it seem that the
email seem harsher than it really is. Many Europeans are naturally very
honest with what
On Mon, 2003-04-21 at 12:58, Jarno Elonen wrote:
It's also worth considering that perhaps there is a language difference
(does Hans have English as a first language?) that make it seem that the
email seem harsher than it really is. Many Europeans are naturally very
honest with what they
On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 01:10:47AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
This aside, it's very clear to me that responding to Hans is a complete
waste of time. He's trolling. If he's just going to keep ranting aimlessly,
I'd say Debian can only assume we're in violation of whatever the license
is,
On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 12:36:10 +0200, Ulrich Eckhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sunday 20 April 2003 22:30, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
If the upstream author is rude to me, he does not deserve any
consideration from myself. If he chooses to alienate his
clientele, he should expect to reap what
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Op za 19-04-2003, om 22:51 schreef Lukas Geyer:
the issue seems to be the fix of #152547. If we are not allowed to
remove a screenful of advertising from the output of a program, then
this unduly restricts the freedom to distribute modified versions.
c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively
when run, you must cause it, when started running for such
interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an
announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a
notice that there
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
