On Mon, 21 Jun 2010, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> No, but we wrote that a free software in our view, should not depend on
> a non-free software. The question is: is this an RPC call to a remote
> (non-free) library. My take is: definitively yes. As we are clearly on
> the line here, so I do respect othe
Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> By this reasoning, we should move IM any IM clients that only talk to
> proprietary servers (MSN, ICQ, etc) to contrib as well. Is that your
> intention?
Not at all, I never wrote this, I quite wrote the opposite in fact.
> Even if we accept the premise that it's a RPC c
Hello everybody,
I am not completely sure it is worth discussing php-recaptcha before
our archive administrators take their decision, but since there are already
other recaptcha packages in our archive…
Le Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 09:34:37PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
>
> There's nothing in yo
On 06/20/2010 02:55 PM, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jelmer Vernooij
* Package name: swat
Version : 0.1.1
Upstream Author : Ricardo Velhote
* URL : http://github.com/rvelhote/GSoC-SWAT
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Py
Hoi,
could someone please help me with a bug in the MTA masqmail?
A fix was already proposed but does it solve the problem the right
way? I am not familiar with ifup/ifdown, ppp and thelike,
unfortunately.
> The same hook script is installed in ip-up.d, ip-down.d, if-up.d and
> if-down.d. If o
Le dimanche 20 juin 2010 à 13:08 +0200, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
> > I don't think this adds anything to the other references and arguments
> > you provided in your post; how about refraining from using this argument
> > in the future?
> It is another long-standing Debian tradition to tell non-develo
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sebastian Reichel
* Package name: fso-gsmd
Version : 0.5.0+git20100602
Upstream Author : Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
* URL : http://www.freesmartphone.org/
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: Vala
Description : freesma
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jelmer Vernooij
* Package name: swat
Version : 0.1.1
Upstream Author : Ricardo Velhote
* URL : http://github.com/rvelhote/GSoC-SWAT
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Samba Web Administration
]] Thomas Goirand
| Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
| > | Some made the comparison (like you just did) with IM clients, specific
| > | browsers (like youtube clients and others), but I don't believe this
| > | applies here. To my opinion, I believe this is a remotely executed
| > | procedure, stored on a
[Petter Reinholdtsen]
> We do not put into non-free programs with patent problems
[Felipe Sateler]
> We do not have a clear policy on what to do with patented software.
> See bug 522373.
I suspect we have the same point, thought you mention "patented
software" and I limit myself to "programs wit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 20/06/10 05:05, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> We do not put into non-free programs with patent problems
We do not have a clear policy on what to do with patented software. See
bug 522373.
- --
Saludos,
Felipe Sateler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE
Dear all,
could you take this out of pkg-php-maint? Debian-legal would ve more
appropriate list to discuss this.
Ondrej Sury
On 20.6.2010, at 18:22, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
| Some made the comparison (like you just did) with IM clients,
specific
| browsers (like you
Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> | Some made the comparison (like you just did) with IM clients, specific
> | browsers (like youtube clients and others), but I don't believe this
> | applies here. To my opinion, I believe this is a remotely executed
> | procedure, stored on a non-free server that we wont e
Quoting Ola Lundqvist (o...@inguza.com):
> Hi Christian
>
> Anyone who take this package over is free to complete this. :-)
Other iso-codes maintainers, would you agree?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Oh, have I? Nice! Administrative rights will be handed
over when needed.
Best regards,
// Ola
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:45:56AM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On 06/20/2010 10:20 AM, Angel Abad wrote:
>> Hi! Im interested in vnc packages too, I use these packages every day. I
>> havent upload ri
On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 21:47:55 +0800
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> I have tried to be as open minded as possible, and asking opinions of
> others, and I don't think I am re-interpreting the DFSG here. IMHO,
> the debate is all about how to consider the recaptcha service (eg: a
> service you connect to, o
]] Thomas Goirand
| Because I took the time to package php-text-captcha, which has been
| ready for MONTHS, it might also give me a bit more of legitimacy to
| comment about a PHP module that I refused to work with, because I
| considered that there was a more free alternative. Have you done such
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> It is another long-standing Debian tradition to tell non-developers to
> STFU when they try to change the meaning of the DFSG.
IMHO, this is not my case, read further.
> You can find the details in the last 6 years of the debian-legal@
> archive...
If you have mind reading
On 06/20/2010 10:20 AM, Angel Abad wrote:
Hi! Im interested in vnc packages too, I use these packages every day. I
havent upload rights, Im sure these packages are important for many
people, so its posible to make a group of intenerested DD and DM in
alioth for maintaintaining vnc related package
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
El 19/06/10 20:41, Ben Armstrong escribió:
> On 19/06/10 11:55 AM, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
>> Bug#586413: RFA: tightvnc -- virtual network computing server software
>> Bug#586414: RFA: vnc4 -- Virtual network computing server software
>>
>
> Although
Hi Christian
Anyone who take this package over is free to complete this. :-)
Best regards,
// Ola
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:26:19PM +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Ola Lundqvist (o...@debian.org):
> > Hi fellow debian developers
> >
> > I have found out that I have less time for Deb
On Jun 20, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I don't think this adds anything to the other references and arguments
> you provided in your post; how about refraining from using this argument
> in the future?
It is another long-standing Debian tradition to tell non-developers to
STFU when they try to ch
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:40:01AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> You are not even a Debian developer so please refrain from trying to
> re-interpret the DFSG to suite your opinions.
I don't think this adds anything to the other references and arguments
you provided in your post; how about refrainin
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Damien Raude-Morvan"
* Package name: spring-build
Version : 2.5.1
Upstream Author : SpringSource Inc.
* URL :
https://src.springframework.org/svn/spring-build/tags/project-build-2.5.1/
* License : Apache-2.0
Programmi
Quoting Ola Lundqvist (o...@debian.org):
> Hi fellow debian developers
>
> I have found out that I have less time for Debian than before.
> Therefore I would like someone to take over some of my packages.
> You can see the list of RFA bugs that I have submitted to
> WNPP.
>
> Bug#586406: RFA: cou
On dim., 2010-06-20 at 11:40 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> You are not even a Debian developer so please refrain from trying to
> re-interpret the DFSG to suite your opinions.
>
Nice, very nice. I'm speechless.
--
Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Jun 20, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Because we don't have the source code of the captcha system itself (you
> only have access to the source code of something that accesses the
> online service), php-recaptcha fails all of the 3 tests when we want to
> use it, which is a good indication that it sh
Hi
I assume so. If there are any issue it would be easy to resolv
as Luca (who is the upstream maintainer) is very easy to discuss with.
I was not aware of any issue.
Best regards,
// Ola
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 01:16:52AM +0200, Serafeim Zanikolas wrote:
> Hi Ola,
>
> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at
Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2010-06-20, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>>> As I see it, php-recaptcha should be sent to non-free (which means
>>> anything depending on it would go in contrib). I'd be happy to see
>>> others expressing themselves here, in order to make sure I don't hold an
>>> extreme view o
Hi Ansgar, and thanks for letting us know what you believe.
Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Thomas Goirand writes:
>
>> Please read point 9 of this document:
>>
>> http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html
>>
>> Because we don't have the source code of the captcha system itself (you
>> only have acc
[Thomas Goirand]
> As I see it, php-recaptcha should be sent to non-free (which means
> anything depending on it would go in contrib). I'd be happy to see
> others expressing themselves here, in order to make sure I don't
> hold an extreme view on this.
Personally, I believe we should limit ourse
On 2010-06-20, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> As I see it, php-recaptcha should be sent to non-free (which means
>> anything depending on it would go in contrib). I'd be happy to see
>> others expressing themselves here, in order to make sure I don't hold an
>> extreme view on this.
[...]
> Compare wi
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:12:09AM +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> I don't get it. Even booting still requires bash
> $ find grub* -executable|xargs checkbashisms #grub-pc 1.98+20100617-1
> script grub-common.preinst is already a bash script; skipping
> script grub-pc.postinst is already a bash
33 matches
Mail list logo
