On Friday 25 March 2005 02:51 pm, Adam McKenna wrote:
No matter how you feel about the term editorial changes, it seems to me
that if these changes were really so bad, and the majority of the project
is now against them, they should be easy enough to roll back.
All we need is another GR.
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 12:48:14PM -0600, Adam Majer wrote:
Andreas Barth wrote:
Actually, I believe the Debian project as whole _wants_ to getting
software released. That was at least the decision in all GRs where
people didn't hide the intents (editorial changes).
Indeed. These types
On Mar 25, Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No matter how you feel about the term editorial changes, it seems to me
that if these changes were really so bad, and the majority of the project is
now against them, they should be easy enough to roll back.
Adam, meet Apathy.
Apathy, meet Adam.
* Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050324 00:35]:
On Thursday 24 March 2005 03:40, Theodore Ts'o [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the free software fanatics succeed in kicking non-free from being
supported by Debian assets, such that the FSF documentation were no
longer available, I'd probably
* Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 22:39]:
I'm also not satisfied with the non-productiveness of the removal of
useful documentation. I'm also ashamed that some hardware doesn't work
out of the box on Debian because we decided that firmware are software
and thus should meet DFSG.
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 10:59:37AM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
* Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 22:39]:
I'm also not satisfied with the non-productiveness of the removal of
useful documentation. I'm also ashamed that some hardware doesn't work
out of the box on Debian because
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please don't rehash old arguments. Nobody has argued that we should put
non-free packages into main, but we don't agree on what is free and what
isn't for all types of packages.
Actually, nobody from the more lenient side has given a description
of
Andreas Barth wrote:
Actually, I believe the Debian project as whole _wants_ to getting
software released. That was at least the decision in all GRs where
people didn't hide the intents (editorial changes).
Indeed. These types of changes are akin to changing a country's
constitution and
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 10:28:36AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please don't rehash old arguments. Nobody has argued that we should put
non-free packages into main, but we don't agree on what is free and what
isn't for all types of packages.
On Mar 24, Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That may be true for documentation but certainly not for firmware, which
has been discussed to death. (Not with a satisfactory outcome, imho.)
And one of the reasons for which licensing for documentation has not
been discussed is that most
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 04:24:41PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
The Vancouver meeting summary upset me, not because of the proposals
to drop architectures, but because it contained a reminder of the
Social Contract changes. The project is moving to what I believe to
be a ridiculously
On Thursday 24 March 2005 03:40, Theodore Ts'o [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the free software fanatics succeed in kicking non-free from being
supported by Debian assets, such that the FSF documentation were no
longer available, I'd probably end up agreeing with you and probably
would do what
Sven Luther wrote:
Still i believe i have made some constructive proposals, and even if my
first posts may have been a bit too aggressive, for which i apologize,
or too many, i think it is also a prove of the passion which lies on
this issue. Something which has the potential to affect many of
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 09:06:19AM -0300, Humberto Massa wrote:
And I believe that the Vancouver proposal, if implemented as intended up
to now, will not only affect what Debian really *is*, but in some ways
will *destroy* what Debian is.
Debian has already decided to destroy what it is by
* Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 16:51]:
Debian has already decided to destroy what it is by giving in to the
crackpots who insist that everything is software.
You mean some people failed to destroy Debian though loudly and very
often repeating the claim that some types of software do
Le mardi 22 mars 2005 à 17:46 +0100, Bernhard R. Link a écrit :
* Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 16:51]:
Debian has already decided to destroy what it is by giving in to the
crackpots who insist that everything is software.
You mean some people failed to destroy Debian though
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 07:36:50PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Le mardi 22 mars 2005 à 17:46 +0100, Bernhard R. Link a écrit :
* Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 16:51]:
Debian has already decided to destroy what it is by giving in to the
crackpots who insist that everything is
[ Please followup to the right list depending on the contents of your
reply. Be aware I'm not subscribed to -kernel, so Cc me if needed ]
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:14:37AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
[huge rant about NEW and hurting kernel stuff etc etc]
Three remarks:
Rejecting those would
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:11:06PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
[ Please followup to the right list depending on the contents of your
reply. Be aware I'm not subscribed to -kernel, so Cc me if needed ]
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:14:37AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
[huge rant about NEW
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:10:34PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:20:29PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Anyway, regarding kernels: I can imagine sometimes, especially with the
backlog we have currently, a swift processing of some kernel package
might be warranted and
Dear, all,
[...]
I'm quite unhappy that this thread has turned so bad. Please, all of us
who are part of this thread, can we please try to get the heat out.
I think we all are happy that ftp-masters and -assistents are currently
working on reducing the NEW queue to a reasonable size. This
* Matthew Wilcox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050321 17:05]:
I'm not going to volunteer for them as I intend to leave Debian
shortly after sarge releases.
Why do you intend to leave Debian?
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:45:10PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Thanks. Maybe i should resign from my debian duties then since i am not
wanted. Do you volunteer to take over my packages ? Please handle parted for
which i am
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:11:06PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
Maybe, if one would reply to all mails you send out, one wouldn't have
time for ANY other Debian work. For example, you contributed 75 mails[1]
within 24 hours to the Vancouver thread, consisting (excluding quoted
text) of
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:20:29PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Anyway, regarding kernels: I can imagine sometimes, especially with the
backlog we have currently, a swift processing of some kernel package
might be warranted and help Sarge. If there is such a case, it would
help if someone
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Thanks. Maybe i should resign from my debian duties then since i am not
wanted. Do you volunteer to take over my packages ? Please handle parted for
which i am searching a co-maintainer since 6 month, and take over the
powerpc
I'm quite unhappy that this thread has turned so bad. Please, all of us
who are part of this thread, can we please try to get the heat out.
I can't agree more. What I have seen up to now is make me very
sad. Seeing Sven considering to resign is sad news for me.
I won't play the others
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:10:12PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Matthew Wilcox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050321 17:05]:
I'm not going to volunteer for them as I intend to leave Debian
shortly after sarge releases.
Why do you intend to leave Debian?
The Vancouver meeting summary upset me, not
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 06:34:00PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
I'm quite unhappy that this thread has turned so bad. Please, all of us
who are part of this thread, can we please try to get the heat out.
I can't agree more. What I have seen up to now is make me very
sad. Seeing Sven
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Matthew,
I didn't realise how emotionally attached I was until I came to write
this mail. I really wish things could have worked out better.
Although I am quite puzzled by the way you treated Sven a
30 matches
Mail list logo
