On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 08:04:36PM +0100, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 08:36:24PM +0200, Teemu Likonen wrote:
On 2009-03-21 19:20 (+0100), Josselin Mouette wrote:
If you need to understand the rationale, please read the thread on
debian-devel with Sponsorship
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 01:11:58PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 01:43:16PM +0100, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
What do you think about such a proposal?
Why are you asking the DPL candidates what they think of this
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 10:25:11AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 01:11:58PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 01:43:16PM +0100, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
What do you think about such a proposal?
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
I expressly refrained to answer your mail because it targetted the DPL
candidate but IMO it's one those false good ideas until you make it a
reality. I'm all for a team of many people improving the base packages,
so find those people and start
Hi,
Thanks for bringing this GR. I'd like to propose an amendment:
AMENDMENT START
General Resolutions are an important framework within the Debian
Project. Yet, in a project the size of Debian, the current requirements
to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In article 87vdq3gcf6@vorlon.ganneff.de
(gmane.linux.debian.devel.general) you wrote:
[...]
PROPOSAL START
General Resolutions are an important framework within the
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
as per Constitution 4.1.3, I am proposing the following General
Resolution.
The original discussion isn't even half over and you come running to us
screaming GR. Way to abuse our constitution and waste everyone's time.
Not appreciated. Not at
On 11697 March 1977, Neil McGovern wrote:
AMENDMENT START
General Resolutions are an important framework within the Debian
Project. Yet, in a project the size of Debian, the current requirements
to initiate one are too
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 01:39:13PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
In article 87vdq3gcf6@vorlon.ganneff.de
(gmane.linux.debian.devel.general) you wrote:
[...]
PROPOSAL START
General Resolutions are an important
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 10:35:32PM -0300, Martín Ferrari wrote:
On Sat, 2009-03-21 at 15:49 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
PROPOSAL START
General Resolutions are an important framework within the Debian
Project.
[second try, this with mutt instead of tin]
In article 87vdq3gcf6@vorlon.ganneff.de
(gmane.linux.debian.devel.general) you wrote:
[...]
PROPOSAL START
General Resolutions are an important framework within the Debian
Le dimanche 22 mars 2009 à 14:55 +0100, Peter Palfrader a écrit :
The original discussion isn't even half over and you come running to us
screaming GR. Way to abuse our constitution and waste everyone's time.
Not appreciated. Not at all.
And should anyone appreciate the fact that FTP
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
la, 2009-03-21 kello 01:42 +, Steve McIntyre kirjoitti:
P.S. Damn, just read Zack's answer and we don't seem to differ very
much. Oh well... :-)
Dear Zack McIntyre, Steve Claes, and Luk Zacchiroli,
What's your opinion on membership procedures?
Last year there
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 04:27:22PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
[second try, this with mutt instead of tin]
In article 87vdq3gcf6@vorlon.ganneff.de
(gmane.linux.debian.devel.general) you wrote:
[...]
PROPOSAL START
2009/3/22 Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org
And should anyone appreciate the fact that FTP masters are wasting
valuable developer time and putting pressure on people to the point they
resign from maintaining critical packages?
If that pressure stems from a concern that without proper license
su, 2009-03-22 kello 17:01 +0100, Luk Claes kirjoitti:
I think we first have to think about what a member, if we need different
types of access/members and what they would be before thinking about the
process(es) to become a member. I do think for instance that
contributers who spend a lot of
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
su, 2009-03-22 kello 17:01 +0100, Luk Claes kirjoitti:
I think we first have to think about what a member, if we need different
types of access/members and what they would be before thinking about the
process(es) to become a member. I do think for instance that
Le dimanche 22 mars 2009 à 16:09 +, Sam Kuper a écrit :
If that pressure stems from a concern that without proper license
information, Debian users/developers/etc could face legal action, then
I, for one, as a Debian user, appreciate it.
Hint #1: the complete list of copyright holders has
Je serai absent(e) à partir du 16/03/2009 de retour le 23/03/2009.
Pour toute demande de VRou de coefficient veuillez faire suivre vos
demandes à l'une des personnes suivantes:
- Virginie Duforest
- Féguy Farouil
- Sylvain Lemonnier
- Gilberte Melan
Pour les autres demandes, j'y répondrais
PROPOSAL START
General Resolutions are an important framework within the Debian
Project. Yet, in a project the size of Debian, the current requirements
to initiate one are too small.
Therefore the Debian project
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 09:56:20PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
PROPOSAL START
General Resolutions are an important framework within the Debian
Project. Yet, in a project the size of Debian, the current requirements
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 03:47:57PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Hi,
I have to disapprove on a proposal whose purpose is essentially to
disfranchise developers from their right related to general resolutions.
General resolutions are a much more democratic and mature processes to handle
conflicts
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:53:02PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
The first GR was passed in June 2003 and there were 804 developers.
The last GR was passed in November 2008 and there were 1018 developers.
Actually, to be fair, the first vote was 1999, with 357 developers.
Neil
--
vorlon We
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr writes:
I have to disapprove on a proposal whose purpose is essentially to
disfranchise developers from their right related to general
resolutions.
This proposed change disenfranchises no-one; no-one's rights are
deprived. It does not
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 10:59:34AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
That's a fair question, but AUIU, it is not up to the proposer, having
already proposed, to decide when the vote gets called.
It's up to the proposer or any of the seconders to do so.
Neil
--
pixie hermanr_: I never studied german
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 16:09:43 +
Sam Kuper sam.ku...@uclmail.net wrote:
2009/3/22 Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org
And should anyone appreciate the fact that FTP masters are wasting
valuable developer time and putting pressure on people to the point
they resign from maintaining
On 22/03/09 at 23:53 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 03:47:57PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Hi,
I have to disapprove on a proposal whose purpose is essentially to
disfranchise developers from their right related to general resolutions.
General resolutions are a much
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:28:56AM +0100, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
Well, because it is in line with the questions which they have been
asked and its both a good chance to see weither they stand on a similar
point
as I do and to see weither anyone is interested in the idea
at all.
28 matches
Mail list logo
