On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 11:41:34AM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> Just to formalize what I've already said...
>
> I think this should be considered for future -private content even if
> the GR Proposal 2 (which I second) is rejected, considering one argument
> against it is that people didn't expect
I second this proposed foundation document.
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:28:53PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
>
I second this proposed foundation document.
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:28:53PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Here is the current version
>
> manoj.
>
> I propose we adopt a foundation document that tries to provide
> guidance and explanation for the transitions required whenever a
>
I second the following proposed amendment.
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 04:57:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes h
I second the following proposed amendment.
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 04:57:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [This version contains typographical fixes, and a tightening
> up of the grammar, of the foundation document. I do not
> believe any substantive changes h
On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 01:48:48AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I propose that the Debian project resolve that:
>
> ==
> Acknowledging that some of our users continue to require the use of
> programs that don't conform to the Deb
On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 01:48:48AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I propose that the Debian project resolve that:
>
> ==
> Acknowledging that some of our users continue to require the use of
> programs that don't conform to the Deb
I second this proposal.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 08:40:14AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
> [This is a repost -- Sven Luther has asked that that my call for seconds
> is not in reply to any other post.]
>
> This is a call for seconds on the proposal I submitted
I second this proposal.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 08:40:14AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
> [This is a repost -- Sven Luther has asked that that my call for seconds
> is not in reply to any other post.]
>
> This is a call for seconds on the proposal I submitted
On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 12:44:06PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 06:59:26PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Draft. Comments welcome. Please Cc the list, not me.
>
> I object to this proposal in its entirety.
Ditto.
On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 12:44:06PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 06:59:26PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Draft. Comments welcome. Please Cc the list, not me.
>
> I object to this proposal in its entirety.
Ditto.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
11 matches
Mail list logo
