Hi Luna,
Am 1. April 2023 16:24:51 MESZ schrieb Luna Jernberg :
>Not really any point to vote as highvoltage is the only one to vote on
I beg to disagree. There is still a point in voting with just one ballot option
available. By following the rules set by our constitution, we ensure we
Hi Antoine,
Am 19.06.22 um 19:31 schrieb Antoine Beaupré:
I second this GR.
I understand people might not *agree* with it, but I still think it's
worth discussing it more, especially in the open.
For discussing things, whether in the open or not, you don't need to
start or second a general
Hi Pierre-Elliott,
Am 11.04.21 um 14:27 schrieb Pierre-Elliott Bécue:
Those who insist on making the personal views on this (non-technical!!!)
GR public should be ashamed of dragging their fellows into denuding
themselves for no good reason.
I am really worried that someone could say that
My previous attempt yielded an invalid signature for me, so, trying again with
a different mailer...
Am 03.04.21 um 01:56 schrieb Craig Sanders:
> Short and simple:
>
> TEXT OF OPTION 5
>
>
> Debian refuses to participate in and denounces the witch-hunt
> against Richard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Am 03.04.21 um 01:56 schrieb Craig Sanders:
> 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
Hi Adam,
Am 03.04.21 um 14:31 schrieb Adam Borowski:
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 02:12:25PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 10:59:53PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
The last amendment (before mine) was accepted on March 30th, which means the
earliest a vote can be called with a
Hi Craig,
Am 03.04.21 um 14:21 schrieb Craig Sanders:
This has been discussed before. It did not reset the minimum discussion
time.
oh wow, a discussion. and a discussion has the power to change debian's
constitution?
Debian's constitution wasn't changed. Please calm down and read up in
the
Hi Craig, hi Zlatan,
Am 03.04.21 um 10:18 schrieb Zlatan Todoric:
On 4/3/21 01:52, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 09:07:15PM +0200, Zlatan Todoric wrote:
Yes, lets use that I am not native English speaker and drown the
conversation with some pointless pedantic approaches now
Hi Adrian,
Am 03.04.21 um 10:25 schrieb Adrian Bunk:
Craig, if you make this a new separate GR I will be glad to sponsor it.
Do you (or anybody actually) have a idea how to deal best with the old
RMS GR if this one is formally accepted?
Regards,
Micha
Hi all,
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 11:28:47PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> This is a late amendment proposal which I hope seconders will feel able to
> support in time for it to make the ballot paper. It is late because I feel
> strongly that events in the past few days [1] [2] [3] [4] risk
Hi Kurt,
On 04.12.19 20:18, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 08:13:30PM +0100, Micha Lenk wrote:
Does a ballot for a DPL vote contain the platforms or just the options?
Just the options. But looking at old ballots, the last non-DPL
election also had the full text of the options
Does a ballot for a DPL vote contain the platforms or just the options?
Hi all,
just because there are some voices complaining about Sam's call for vote, I
feel the need to raise my otherwise more silent voice. All in all I concur with
Sam's assessment that all options are covered well enough to form opinions. Now
let's vote and see where we are today. And it's
Hi all,
I support avoiding the term diversity in the context of this GR for the already
mentioned good reasons. However, I would consider "alternative init systems" a
better phrase than "multiple init systems" in this context (if that matters
from a non-native speaker).
Regards,
Micha
Am 27.
Hi all,
On 10.03.19 18:48, Zlatan Todorić wrote:
maybe we will live to our long history of community fostering (which is
the thing I most enjoy from Debian, besides that we produce kickass OS)
and be leaderless as we in all nature of project actually are.
If this ("leaderless as we in all
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I second the following proposed GR:
Am 09.09.2016 um 18:27 schrieb Ian Jackson:
> I have changed my about waiting before making a formal proposal.
>
> I hereby propose the following General Resolution.
>
> Title: Acknowledge difficulty of
Hi David,
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 01:20:58PM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> [...] no official document defines d-private (beside the GR2005 maybe
> implicitly), [...]
This is not entirely true. The Debian Developers Reference, section 4.1.3
"Special lists" contains this paragraph:
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
TL,DR: Nice proposal, seconded.
Am 08.09.2016 um 18:07 schrieb Ian Jackson:
> Lars Wirzenius writes ("Re: Proposed GR: Repeal the 2005 vote for
> declassification of the debian-private mailing list"):
>> If we're going to have another discussion
Hi Don,
On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 02:33:34PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote on the
debian-private list:
> On Tue, 09 Aug 2016, Micha Lenk wrote in response to
> > > [... someone writing on debian-private that the upcoming GR was announced
> > > in advance on d-d-a (<20160710
Hi everybody,
Am 08.08.2016 um 16:58 schrieb Don Armstrong:
> On Sun, 07 Aug 2016, Micha Lenk wrote:
>> That would establishing some kind of "ex post facto" law (which by the
>> way is prohibited in many constitutions for good reasons). I really
>> don't want to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi all,
sorry for joining the discussion late. I just realized when reading
the call for votes that I should have joined the discussion earlier.
Am 16.07.2016 um 23:06 schrieb Julien Cristau:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 13:17:24 -0700, Don Armstrong
21 matches
Mail list logo
