On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 01:15:02PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 01:58:02PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Use of debian seems to be limited because it isn't on any approved
lists and charties can't get funding for an independent evaluation at
the moment. Would you support using
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 08:49:51AM +, Matthew Johnson wrote:
On Sat Mar 14 19:40, Russ Allbery wrote:
It makes an advisory project statement about the project interpretation of
the FD. DDs can choose to follow that interpretation or not as they
choose in their own work, but I would
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
With thanks to suggestions from Wouter Verhelst and Russ Allbery, I
present a redrafted amendment. Seeing as none of the proposers have
responded, I ask for seconds. The rationale remains the same: almost
no evidence has been presented for Q or 2Q
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 02:28:21AM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 01:15:02PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
This is also an issue in some other industries for things like the PCI
DSS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_DSS), FWIW.
Taken with a grain of salt, but I can't
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 02:12:17AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
Getting seconds is not a vote. It's a low-level check that there is
minimum support for an opinion.
It's also the most reliable way for a developer to issue a statement of
support that will be seen by voters
Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 02:12:17AM +0100, Frans Pop a écrit :
Fun! Maybe we should just dispense with the voting and just let the
highest number of seconds win?
That sounds like a good idea. Since it is a supermajority vote, I
recommend to the proposer to drop the GR
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
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
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, Neil McGovern wrote:
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
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 01:52:43PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 08:43:16AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
AMENDMENT START
Replace too small with thought to be too small, but there is a
lack of evidence
MJ Ray m...@phonecoop.coop writes:
AMENDMENT START
Replace too small with thought to be too small, but there is a
lack of evidence about the correct level.
Replace clause c with c) if a year has passed, starting from
MJ Ray wrote:
Replace too small with thought to be too small, but there is a
lack of evidence about the correct level.
Replace clause c with c) if a year has passed, starting from the
proposal of a general resolution, without any proposal receiving the
required number of seconds, then this
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 01:52:43PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 08:43:16AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
AMENDMENT START
Replace too small with thought to be too small, but there is a
lack of evidence
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 01:12:45AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:42:40PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
Hello developers,
I am hereby proposing the amendement below to the General resolution
entitled Enhance requirements for General resolutions.
PROPOSAL
On Saturday 21 March 2009 13:00:01 Joerg Jaspert wrote:
There are some that do not take part in the discussions but vote, there
are those who do not even follow debian-vote because they do not feel
it is worth the effort, and those that are simply not active at all. I
do not have the
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 01:26:33PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
Are you promoting the practice of voting by I haven't got a clue what
this vote is about, but my friend X is supporting option C so I'll vote
for that here? I know it happens, but I'd prefer to make that harder
rather than
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 04:10:49PM -0700, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Hi,
I am hereby proposing the amendment below to the general resolution
entitled Enhance requirements for General resolutions.
PROPOSAL START
=
General
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 07:07:03PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 01:12:45AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:42:40PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
Hello developers,
I am hereby proposing the amendement below to the General resolution
which censorship
Does it matter?
I think we can guess what he meant to say even though he may have used
the wrong word for the purpose.
Could people please stop bringing this up again and
again?
The best way of helping that is to ignore
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 12:43:06PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
Do you have any further ideas yourself on where we should spend our
money?
How about paying grants to other charities to evaluate debian, to
adapt it to meet their needs and deploy it, or to hold
19 matches
Mail list logo
