On Thu, 16 Sep 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Kurt, my inclination was to consider this change as falling under
Constitution §A.1.3 as a change that does not alter the meaning of
the proposal.
Since you don't actually need seconders under §4.2.1, and you are the
proposer of the original
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 09:36:50AM -0500, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
Even better, now with attachments!
There is yet another pronoun I have missed. Please find a patch
attached.
Applied (wording / punctuation fix), thanks!
New current text is attached.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:40:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I'm hereby introducing two changes:
a) dropping the name Debian Contributor
(attachment 0001-remove-the-term-Debian-Contributor.patch)
b) fixing punctuation as suggested by Kumar Appaiah [1], thanks!
(attachment
On su, 2010-09-19 at 11:33 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 09:36:50AM -0500, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
Even better, now with attachments!
There is yet another pronoun I have missed. Please find a patch
attached.
Applied (wording / punctuation fix), thanks!
New
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 19.09.2010 17:06, schrieb Lars Wirzenius:
On su, 2010-09-19 at 11:33 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 09:36:50AM -0500, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
Even better, now with attachments!
There is yet another pronoun I have
Le dimanche 19 septembre 2010 11:33:24, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 09:36:50AM -0500, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
Even better, now with attachments!
There is yet another pronoun I have missed. Please find a patch
attached.
Applied (wording / punctuation fix),
Hi!
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 11:33:24AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
To that end, the project benefits from various types of contributions,
including, but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
infrastructure
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 11:33:24AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
To that end, the project benefits from various types of contributions,
including, but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
infrastructure and
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 06:42:18PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
Kurt, my inclination was to consider this change as falling under
Constitution §A.1.3 as a change that does not alter the meaning of the
proposal.
That would be A.1.6?
Yes, totally, sorry for the typo.
My question was basicly
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:40:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I'm hereby introducing two changes:
Even better, now with attachments!
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:40:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
My question was basicly if you wanted to make that change
at that time. My interpretation is that you didn't propose
to change it at that time, but that you would do it at some
later time.
The question was which part
Dear Zack,
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:56:32AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:40:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
I'm hereby introducing two changes:
Even better, now with attachments!
There is yet another pronoun I have missed. Please find a patch
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 06:52:02PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
In case these changes are regarded as more than editorial (which is your
call, but I feel they are), the new proposal requires new seconds
I'm not sure why you think the proposal requires seconds if it
replaces an older
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:40:09PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I'll let the patch linger for a couple of days -- actually, I'll be away
for most part of tomorrow -- and then I'll apply it, posting a new
complete draft here shortly thereafter.
So I'm not considering this currently as an
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:48:02PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I like that a lot more than the other wording, thus seconded.
Please don't go and make this more confusing for me. As far as I
can tell this wasn't meant to be amendment yet. He will probably
accept this or something
Le Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 02:03:01PM +0100, Matthew Johnson a écrit :
OTOH, if we pass a GR that looks like we'll give them upload rights (because
it just says they are DDs) and then they aren't given upload rights some
people might feel upset that they voted for it. Just because it's not
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:51:51PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Stefano's DPL platform is actually quite clear on the subject:
snip
After seeing the results of this choice, it will always be possible to
change the procedure, especially if a later DPL is elected with a
platform that goes more
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 04:08:50PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:40:09PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I'll let the patch linger for a couple of days -- actually, I'll be away
for most part of tomorrow -- and then I'll apply it, posting a new
complete draft here
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:45:52AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:48:02PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I like that a lot more than the other wording, thus seconded.
Please don't go and make this more confusing for me. As far as I
can tell this wasn't meant
On 15/09/10 at 12:08 +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Naming (raised by at least Luca and Lars [8,9])
==
Ah, what a mess!
Until a few minutes before posting the GR proposal, the text contained a
s/Debian Members/non-uploading Debian Developers/ and before that
On ke, 2010-09-15 at 09:26 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into
second-class
members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid giving them a name,
and emphasize the
On 09:26 Wed 15 Sep , Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into
second-class
members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid giving them a name,
and emphasize the fact
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:26:59AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into second-class
members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid giving them a name,
and emphasize
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:26:59AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into
second-class members of the project. A way to do that is to avoid
giving them a name, and
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
including but not limited to: package maintenance, translations,
infrastructure
Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
* Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
Debian Developers, albeit without upload access to the Debian archive.
*
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 02:13:12PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
I like that a lot more than the other wording, thus seconded.
Thanks for your appreciation, but wait! :-) There are no need of seconds
for this change (unless some of the previous seconders considers it
unfaithful with respect to the
On 15/09/10 at 21:00 +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Attached you can find a tentative wording of a proposal which remove the
term Debian Contributors, pretty similar to the version I had before
posting (shame on me for changing that!), but maybe a bit better in that
it doesn't the horrible
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:16:00PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
It seems to me that, if “albeit without upload access to the Debian
archive” were removed, it would not close the possibility for the
people in charge to difference of status.
snip
Would such a change be a happy end for everybody
Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:01:47PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:16:00PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
It seems to me that, if “albeit without upload access to the Debian
archive” were removed, it would not close the possibility for the
people in charge to
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:26:59AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
If we go for DDs without upload rights, I think that we should be
extremely careful about not transforming this new kind of DDs into
second-class members of
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 02:13:12PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
The Debian project aims at producing the best free operating system.
To that end the project benefits from various types of contributions,
including
On 09/15/2010 02:16 PM, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
* Endorse the idea that contributors of non-packaging work might become
Debian Developers, albeit
Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:02:34PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz a écrit :
On 09/15/2010 02:16 PM, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:00:32PM +0900, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
The Debian project therefore invites the Debian Account Managers to:
* Endorse the idea that
34 matches
Mail list logo
