On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:02:58AM +, Enrico Zini wrote:
If you end up being the whole candidate,
It ended up being the case, apparently.
it could be interesting to turn 'talk about the platform' into a 'talk
about how to improve on last year (if at all possible)'.
...which might not
Hi,
On Freitag, 11. März 2011, Joachim Breitner wrote:
A mudslinging party is not something to aim for.
Right.
But if it turns out
that there are differing views on important project-wide issues within
Debian, and there are candidates for each side of some discussion, then
having an
Joachim Breitner wrote:
A mudslinging party is not something to aim for. But if it turns out
that there are differing views on important project-wide issues within
Debian, and there are candidates for each side of some discussion,
then having an intense debate over these issue within the
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:10:12AM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
Absolutly. But I also absolutly dont see, why this has to turn into a
mudslinging party. One can disagree very much and very fiercly,
without mudslinging. At least thats what I expect from people
running for DPL.
Agreed, thanks
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:27:10AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
/me, fearing more and more that he'll have to throw mud at himself
If you end up being the whole candidate, it could be interesting to turn
'talk about the platform' into a 'talk about how to improve on last year
(if at all
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:16:41AM +0100, Amaya wrote:
Joachim Breitner wrote:
A mudslinging party is not something to aim for. But if it turns out
that there are differing views on important project-wide issues within
Debian, and there are candidates for each side of some discussion,
then
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Enrico Zini enr...@enricozini.org wrote:
If you end up being the whole candidate, it could be interesting to turn
'talk about the platform' into a 'talk about how to improve on last year
(if at all possible)'.
Yes. We would like to know zack's 'evil' plan for
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 01:10:18AM +0100, Amaya wrote:
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I can't be the only one who believes we should have had a female DPL
years ago. So here's to you, Amaya, Margarita, Erinn, Hanna, and
Christine: send in that candidacy!
Thanks for having me in mind, but I want
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 01:10:18AM +0100, Amaya wrote:
Thanks for having me in mind, but I want zack to win again :9 and the
mudslinging party at the nomination proccess puts me off, sorry.
Thanks for pointing out the mudslinging part. I've always thought it's a
completely unnecessary waste of
Hi,
Am Donnerstag, den 10.03.2011, 12:35 + schrieb Enrico Zini:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 01:10:18AM +0100, Amaya wrote:
Thanks for having me in mind, but I want zack to win again :9 and the
mudslinging party at the nomination proccess puts me off, sorry.
Thanks for pointing out the
On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 07:20:17PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 12:09:16PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
I think that is very likely to make the other nominations and
discussion close to a NOOP. Of course, I'm not discouraging any other
DD to nominate him/herself and
Hi,
Am Dienstag, den 08.03.2011, 19:20 +0100 schrieb Stefano Zacchiroli:
More generally, recent elections seem to show that the more
the candidates, the more interesting and useful the debate.
if you are looking for “interesting” discussion, how about ask J. S. and
others of that caliber to
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 04:29:41PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 07:38:18PM +0100, Debian Project Secretary - Kurt
Roeckx wrote:
Prospective leaders should be familiar with the constitution, but
just to review: there's a one week period when interested
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I can't be the only one who believes we should have had a female DPL
years ago. So here's to you, Amaya, Margarita, Erinn, Hanna, and
Christine: send in that candidacy!
Thanks for having me in mind, but I want zack to win again :9 and the
mudslinging party at the
Stefano Zacchiroli dijo [Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 04:29:41PM +0100]:
Prospective leaders should be familiar with the constitution, but
just to review: there's a one week period when interested
developers can nominate themselves and announce their platform,
followed by a three week period
On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 12:09:16PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
I think that is very likely to make the other nominations and
discussion close to a NOOP. Of course, I'm not discouraging any other
DD to nominate him/herself and compete to win
I believe that a DPL election with a single candidate,
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 04:29:41PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I hereby nominate myself for the forthcoming DPL elections.
Your nomination has been received and is valid.
Kurt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
On Samstag, 5. März 2011, Sean Finney wrote:
I nominate Stefano Zacchiroli.
seconded, LOL :)
I of course understand if he wants to take a break after the last year,
but couldn't pass up the chance to be the first to make the
(re-)nomination :)
Gah, I was thinking the same but first
On 05/03/11 at 08:08 +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On la, 2011-03-05 at 08:58 +0100, Sean Finney wrote:
I nominate Stefano Zacchiroli.
I of course understand if he wants to take a break after the last year,
but couldn't pass up the chance to be the first to make the
(re-)nomination :)
Hi,
According to the constitution (5.2. Appointment), project
leader elections should begin six weeks before the leadership
post becomes vacant, or (if it is too late already) immediately.
The new project leader term starts on Sunday the 17th of April,
2011. The time line looks like:
| Period
I nominate Stefano Zacchiroli.
I of course understand if he wants to take a break after the last year,
but couldn't pass up the chance to be the first to make the
(re-)nomination :)
Sean
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
21 matches
Mail list logo
