Phil Morrell writes:
> Do the additional proposals made in that week mean the discussion period
> has automatically been extended? Is the Secretary simply being pragmatic
> here, executing discretion before announcing the start of the voting
> period? Or perhaps the DPL has likely requested
On Fri, 2 Apr 2021, Craig Sanders wrote:
> Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt against Richard
> Stallman, the Free Software Foundation, and the members of the board of the
> Free Software Foundation.
Hi, please can you explain how this is significantly different from
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 21:29:27 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> The option is now on the website.
Hi, I was wondering if anyone would mind explaining a point of procedure
to me here. I understand that the discussion period is normally 2 weeks,
and that the DPL confirmed a request to reduce it to 1
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Assuming that the letter from https://rms-support-letter.github.io/ is
> signed by Debian, could we please have clarified up front how the above
There are evidently some who wish that there was more up front clarity
about
As a reminder, we're past the minimum discussion period.
At this point, anyone who has proposed or seconded something on the
ballot can call for a vote.
The secretary may add delay for example so votes start on the weekened.
My general opinion is that someone should call for a vote at this
On 2021-04-01 9:01 p.m., Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> defeat communism and prevent it from raising
> its ugly head again.
Option 6:
"Debian will fight hard to defeat communism and prevent it from raising
its ugly head again, whatever this GR is about".
Come on folks, we can do better than that!
--
Short and simple:
TEXT OF OPTION 5
Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt against Richard
Stallman, the Free Software Foundation, and the members of the board of the
Free Software Foundation.
On Thursday, 1 April 2021 7:56:12 PM AEDT Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Freedom of speech is one of the theoretically most beautiful ideas
> Humans ever created. So is Communism.
Communism (i.e. fascism + marxism) is an ultimate "cancel culture" that
terminated at least 100 million lives in 20th
On 4/1/21 11:20 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> The open letter does not state that RMS should be ejected from the free
> software movement in general, or from the FSF specifically. Were that
> the case, I would agree with you that it was wrong. Instead, it merely
> states that he should be removed
On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 11:51 +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult.
> He
> takes social awkwardness to new heights. He’s remarkably stubborn in
> technical matters even when outside his domain of expertise and
> completely wrong. He
Hi Barak,
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:51:59AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
[...]
> I'm not sure he'd be an ideal board member, but that’s a practical
> rather than ethical consideration, and surely best left to the
> judgement of the individual organization.
>
> What’s problematic to me
The option is now on the website.
Kurt
On 2021-04-01 at 15:06, Milan Zamazal wrote:
>> "JS" == Jonas Smedegaard writes:
>
> JS> Question is, this being a process to compose a ballot for a
> JS> vote: How to transform those observations into a text for the
> JS> ballot? Or if that is absurd, how else to proceed
> "JS" == Jonas Smedegaard writes:
JS> Question is, this being a process to compose a ballot for a
JS> vote: How to transform those observations into a text for the
JS> ballot? Or if that is absurd, how else to proceed (other than
JS> shrug and let the boting process
Hello,
On 01.04.21 20:08, Bart Martens wrote:
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 05:00:47PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
The constitution says:
3. Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes, tallies, and
results are not revealed during the voting period; after the vote
the Project
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 05:00:47PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> The constitution says:
> 3. Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes, tallies, and
>results are not revealed during the voting period; after the vote
>the Project Secretary lists all the votes cast. The
On April 1, 2021 10:33:02 PM GMT+05:30, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 07:30:10PM +0300, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
>>On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 05:12:55PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>> *No* attempt has been made to sign that open letter on behalf of the
>>> project.
>>
Kurt Roeckx writes:
...
>after the vote the Project Secretary lists all the votes cast.
...
> You could say that "all the votes cast" could mean what was voted,
You could also note that there is no stipulation of how soon after the
vote that publication must occur, and decide that in
Felix Lechner writes:
> Moving to new software without preparation or a chance to practice
We would have to pass a constitutional amendment to allow for secret votes
for anything other than DPL elections, at least by my understanding of the
constitution and this thread, so there will be plenty
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:18:08AM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 9:59 AM Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >
> > I could move to voting software like Belenios
>
> Moving to new software without preparation or a chance to practice
> could discourage centrist voters—i.e. those
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 09:47:51AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I didn't quite parse that, so I'm not sure if this is what you were
> already proposing, but I wonder if we should just have secret ballots for
> all votes.
My bad for my previous non-parsable paragraph. I was proposing something
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 10:18:08-0700, Felix Lechner a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 9:59 AM Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >
> > I could move to voting software like Belenios
>
> Moving to new software without preparation or a chance to practice
> could discourage centrist voters—i.e. those
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 9:59 AM Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>
> I could move to voting software like Belenios
Moving to new software without preparation or a chance to practice
could discourage centrist voters—i.e. those who care least but provide
the gravity to hold the project together.
It could
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 07:30:10PM +0300, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 05:12:55PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> *No* attempt has been made to sign that open letter on behalf of the
>> project.
>
>https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2021/03/msg00061.html
>>8
>I am
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 09:47:51AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
>
> > This is probably something that should be fixed in the Constitution, by
> > mandating secret voting for elections whereas living to the judgment of
> > the secretary whether other GR votes should be
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> This is probably something that should be fixed in the Constitution, by
> mandating secret voting for elections whereas living to the judgment of
> the secretary whether other GR votes should be secret or not.
I didn't quite parse that, so I'm not sure if this is
On 31.03.21 00:28, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> CHOICE TEXT FOLLOWS:
>
> This is a position statement of the Debian Developers in accordance with
> our constitution, section 4.1.5.
>
> The Developers firmly believe that leaders in any prominent organisation
> are, and should be, held to the
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 05:12:55PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> *No* attempt has been made to sign that open letter on behalf of the
> project.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2021/03/msg00061.html
>8
I am sure there is a precedent of a position statement being announced
without
Forgot to reply to that, wich is actually super important.
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 18:57:12+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:50:15PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > The first option is one option, the others are different and less
> > strong. Having strong
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 19:04:41+0300, Andrei POPESCU a écrit :
> On Jo, 01 apr 21, 17:00:47, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >
> > This would be a vote I would also like to see as secret. The
> > constitution says:
> > 3. Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes, tallies, and
> >results
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 18:57:12+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:50:15PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > The first option is one option, the others are different and less
> > strong. Having strong options in a GR doesn't turn the whole GR in a
> > blackmail
Hello,
On 01.04.21 15:52, Pasha wrote:
On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 15:38 +0200, Ulrike Uhlig wrote:
Goals might evolve. It's also called "growing up".
Now, if you tell me the goal of Debian changed from free OS to
something else - it is not the reason I am using Debian.
Did I say that or could
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 06:57:12PM +0300, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:50:15PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>> The first option is one option, the others are different and less
>> strong. Having strong options in a GR doesn't turn the whole GR in a
>> blackmail
>
>I
On Jo, 01 apr 21, 17:00:47, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>
> This would be a vote I would also like to see as secret. The
> constitution says:
> 3. Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes, tallies, and
>results are not revealed during the voting period; after the vote
>the
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:50:15PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> The first option is one option, the others are different and less
> strong. Having strong options in a GR doesn't turn the whole GR in a
> blackmail
I would disagree. Especially, given that the first attempt to
"sign on
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 8:01 AM Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>
> This would be a vote I would also like to see as secret. The
Maybe a solution would be to offer two alternatives of each option on
the ballot—one as currently stated, and one that includes a secret
vote instruction to the secretary. It
Stefano Zacchiroli, 2021-04-01 10:41 -0400:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:42:01PM +, Jean Duprat (Avignon) wrote:
> > Votes in leadership elections are kept secret even after the end of
> > the voting period for obvious reasons: by knowing that the ballot is
> > secret, voters can feel free to
1 avril 2021 17:01 "Kurt Roeckx" a écrit:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:40:59PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:42:01PM +, Jean Duprat (Avignon) wrote:
>> Votes in leadership elections are kept secret even after the end of
>> the voting period for obvious
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:40:59PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:42:01PM +, Jean Duprat (Avignon) wrote:
> > Votes in leadership elections are kept secret even after the end of
> > the voting period for obvious reasons: by knowing that the ballot is
> > secret,
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 10:46:16-0400, Roberto C. Sánchez a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:39:05PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> >
> > Your statement tends to show likewise. My guess is that you tend to also
> > look for the bad thing that is neither written or implied.
> >
> I was
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 16:58:25+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 03:38:03PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > You are systematically telling "i don't care" to what we say
>
> That's lie, I've not ignored your arguments so far.
If you say so
> > deciding that
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:39:05PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>
> Your statement tends to show likewise. My guess is that you tend to also
> look for the bad thing that is neither written or implied.
>
I was not looking for anything. The responses simply stood out as quite
possibly
Sergey B Kirpichev, 2021-04-01 09:24 -0400:
> It doesn't matter. The message is clear: do what we want or go out.
Our message is "follow the guidelines we've set for behaviour towards
each other or you're not welcome to interact with other members of the
community"?! I'm... I'm truly shocked.
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:42:01PM +, Jean Duprat (Avignon) wrote:
> Votes in leadership elections are kept secret even after the end of
> the voting period for obvious reasons: by knowing that the ballot is
> secret, voters can feel free to express their opinion as they see
> fit. This
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 09:38:58-0400, Roberto C. Sánchez a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 03:15:08PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 08:40:26-0400, Roberto C. Sánchez a écrit :
> > > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 01:58:49PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > > >
Well, I'm still trying to hear users voice. For me, it seems they
may disagree with you.
We could make a press release with an opinion poll attached… rather than
pushing for a press release that wrongly implies that every debian
contributor thinks the same way and agrees.
Except that
On 4/1/21 15:52, Pasha wrote:
Please speak only for yourself and not for "all Debian users", I
doubt
you know all of them :)
Goals might evolve. It's also called "growing up".
I started using Debian when I was in school.
Now, if you tell me the goal of Debian changed from free OS to
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:17 AM Pasha wrote:
>
> Could you please provide any historical example of your "mob justice" ?
Sadly, a discussion over proof cannot solve the issue. The request of
a single eligible voter—motivated by fear or otherwise—should trigger
a secret procedure. (Although
On 4/1/21 3:38 PM, Ulrike Uhlig wrote:
Please speak only for yourself and not for "all Debian users", I doubt
you know all of them :)
Goals might evolve. It's also called "growing up".
Or giving up
Ever heard about the change curve? When change happens around us, we go
through different
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 03:38:03PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> You are systematically telling "i don't care" to what we say
That's lie, I've not ignored your arguments so far.
> deciding that this is a blackmail and smearing campaign.
I'd explained this in details. In case of doubts:
On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 15:38 +0200, Ulrike Uhlig wrote:
> Sergey,
>
> On 01.04.21 15:24, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
> > > You're making a good cause to make the lists read-only for non-
> > > members
> >
> > I'm trying to argue my position, instead of long reasonings about
> > feelings of my
On 4/1/21 15:24, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
You're making a good cause to make the lists read-only for non-members
I'm trying to argue my position, instead of long reasonings about
feelings of my opponents and so on. Is that wrong for the Debian now?
You're not arguing, you're just "throwing"
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 04:10:32PM +0300, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:11:18PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > Nod, that's exactly what it was. Maybe polite requests aren't
> > effective enough for some people.
>
> Maybe it was not a polite request at all. Just another
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 03:15:08PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 08:40:26-0400, Roberto C. Sánchez a écrit :
> > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 01:58:49PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > > Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 12:11:18+0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
> > > > On
Sergey,
On 01.04.21 15:24, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
You're making a good cause to make the lists read-only for non-members
I'm trying to argue my position, instead of long reasonings about
feelings of my opponents and so on. Is that wrong for the Debian now?
To what goal are you trying to
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 16:24:10+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> > You're making a good cause to make the lists read-only for non-members
>
> I'm trying to argue my position, instead of long reasonings about
> feelings of my opponents and so on. Is that wrong for the Debian now?
You are
> You're making a good cause to make the lists read-only for non-members
I'm trying to argue my position, instead of long reasonings about
feelings of my opponents and so on. Is that wrong for the Debian now?
> Maybe some wording somewhere is strong
It doesn't matter. The message is clear: do
On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 12:42 +, Jean Duprat (Avignon) wrote:
> Votes in leadership elections are kept secret even after the end of
> the voting period for obvious reasons: by knowing that the ballot is
> secret, voters can feel free to express their opinion as they see
> fit. This
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 08:40:26-0400, Roberto C. Sánchez a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 01:58:49PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 12:11:18+0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
> > > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:40:35AM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > > >Le
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:11:18PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Nod, that's exactly what it was. Maybe polite requests aren't
> effective enough for some people.
Maybe it was not a polite request at all. Just another
blackmail, like the vote is, isn't?
Votes in leadership elections are kept secret even after the end of the voting
period for obvious reasons: by knowing that the ballot is secret, voters can
feel free to express their opinion as they see fit. This constitutional
guarantee sadly does not apply to General Resolutions.
The GR
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 01:58:49PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 12:11:18+0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
> > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:40:35AM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > >Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 03:52:23+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> > >> >
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 11:51:59+0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter a écrit :
> I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult. He
> takes social awkwardness to new heights. He’s remarkably stubborn in
> technical matters even when outside his domain of expertise and
> completely
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 12:11:18+0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:40:35AM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> >Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 03:52:23+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> >> > Please stop now.
> >>
> >> Or?...
> >
> >Actually we could ask you to be banned
Greetings, Debianites,
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:51:59AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult. He
takes social awkwardness to new heights. He’s remarkably stubborn in
technical matters even when outside his domain of expertise
Quoting Barak A. Pearlmutter (2021-04-01 12:51:59)
> I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult. He
> takes social awkwardness to new heights. He’s remarkably stubborn in
> technical matters even when outside his domain of expertise and
> completely wrong. He is not a fun
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:40:35AM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 03:52:23+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
>> > Please stop now.
>>
>> Or?...
>
>Actually we could ask you to be banned from Debian lists, but here I
>assume it was merely a request.
Nod, that's
I can personally vouch for the fact that RMS can be very difficult. He
takes social awkwardness to new heights. He’s remarkably stubborn in
technical matters even when outside his domain of expertise and
completely wrong. He is not a fun house guest. His manners as a dinner
guest are atrocious. He
Inspired! (by what :-) ?)
Have a beautiful day, Enrico.
On 31/03/2021 23:52, Enrico Zini wrote:
Hello Debian Members,
For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR
discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need
to be. Having a chilling effect to
On 01.04.21 10:19, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> Bonus points for writing the entire reply as an attached .doc, or even
> better .ppt, file (MS Office 1997 version or earlier).
Additional bonus points for using Comic Sans!
Cheers
Daniel
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi,
> Hi,
>
> I hereby propose to have another option on the ballot:
>
> ---8<---8<---8<---
> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
> readmission to the FSF board seen at https://rms-support-letter.github.io/.
> The text of this statement is given below.
>
>
* Andrei POPESCU [2021-04-01 11:19]:
Bonus points for writing the entire reply as an attached .doc, or even
better .ppt, file (MS Office 1997 version or earlier).
Kindly refer to the EBCDIC encoded WordStar document on my dial-in BBS
for a thorough rebuttal.
Cheers
Timo
signature.asc
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:28:16AM +0200, Christian Kastner wrote:
> On 01.04.21 10:11, Santiago R.R. wrote:
> > What happens if Kurt also wants to take part in the discussion? Should
> > we decide on who will review the messages and announce the winner of
> > that discussion?
>
> I was worried
Le mercredi 31 mars 2021 à 09:12:24+1100, Dmitry Smirnov a écrit :
> On Wednesday, 24 March 2021 11:38:25 PM AEDT Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > Freedom of speech does *not* mean freedom from consequences.
>
> Here is a good reply to this very statement:
>
> ~~~
> "Freedom of speech is supposed to
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 00:52:53+0200, Enrico Zini a écrit :
> Hello Debian Members,
>
> For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR
> discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need
> to be. Having a chilling effect to using GRs hurts Debian, and as
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 10:40:35AM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 03:52:23+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> > > Please stop now.
> >
> > Or?...
>
> Actually we could ask you to be banned from Debian lists
I expected that. "Free" society as it is. Argements -
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 04:09:58+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 06:24:52PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > I could be wrong, but it seems to me that you still are on a debian
> > mailing list while you clearly stated you wanted to sever your ties with
> >
On 01.04.21 10:11, Santiago R.R. wrote:
> What happens if Kurt also wants to take part in the discussion? Should
> we decide on who will review the messages and announce the winner of
> that discussion?
I was worried about this, too.
I'm not sure that deciding on another reviewer is feasible.
Le jeudi 01 avril 2021 à 03:52:23+0300, Sergey B Kirpichev a écrit :
> > Please stop now.
>
> Or?...
Actually we could ask you to be banned from Debian lists, but here I
assume it was merely a request.
--
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far
Very well crafted april's fool :-)
Cheers,
Filippo
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:52:53AM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
Hello Debian Members,
For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR
discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need
to be. Having a
On 4/1/21 03:09, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 06:24:52PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that you still are on a debian
mailing list while you clearly stated you wanted to sever your ties with
Debian.
And what's wrong? Anyone can
On Jo, 01 apr 21, 00:12:56, Jessica Clarke wrote:
> On 1 Apr 2021, at 00:06, Alejandro Nadal wrote:
>
> > (If this message breaks the mailing list protocol in any way, I am
> > deeply sorry, I am new to these debian mailing lists)
>
> Top-posting is awful and should be an instant rejection of
El 31/03/21 a las 20:14, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz escribió:
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021, 19:53 Enrico Zini wrote:
> > Hello Debian Members,
> >
> > For some time, we have been having systemic issues that make GR
> > discussions painful. GRs themselves shouldn't be painful, and don't need
> > to be.
On Friday, 26 March 2021 7:12:09 PM AEDT Timo Weingärtner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I hereby propose to have another option on the ballot:
>
> ---8<---8<---8<---
> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
> readmission to the FSF board seen at
>
On Friday, 26 March 2021 7:12:09 PM AEDT Timo Weingärtner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I hereby propose to have another option on the ballot:
>
> ---8<---8<---8<---
> The Debian Project co-signs the statement regarding Richard Stallman's
> readmission to the FSF board seen at
85 matches
Mail list logo
