martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.03.11.1715 +0100]:
That people who would like to know more about Debian internals
have no easy way of finding out, and if they approach those that
know at the wrong time, or not in the way those would expect,
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
Yes, but this doesn't *quite* answer my question.
The question is whether the bts people will make their own decision
about anything, or just do whatever the maintainer says.
Of course they'll look over whatever bug you claim
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
I'm not attacking at all; I'm not accusing you of any kind of
impropriety. But what is crucial is the avoidance of the *appearance*
of any impropriety.
Mmm. I'm not really sure that You're not acting improperly, it just
*looks* like your
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
I'm not attacking at all; I'm not accusing you of any kind of
impropriety. But what is crucial is the avoidance of the *appearance*
of any impropriety.
Mmm. I'm not really sure that You're not acting improperly, it just
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
Do you understand why judges aren't allowed to judge their own cases?
Hint: it is not because we don't trust judges.
See, that was unnecessarily snarky.
And yes, it _is_ because we don't trust judges -- and justifiably so,
they are deciding
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
Do you understand why judges aren't allowed to judge their own cases?
Hint: it is not because we don't trust judges.
See, that was unnecessarily snarky.
But see, I wasn't trying to be snarky at all.
No, you weren't, and that's
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
Do you understand this trivially obvious thing? Obviously you don't,
so here's a hint. is not being particularly polite -- it's showing
off how smart you are and how dumb your correspondent is.
Actually, it turns out we disagree about the thing in
also sprach Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au [2005.03.11.0158 +0100]:
I can't see any way of having polite reminders work without some
sort of statement from the DPL or the listmasters, probably with
the prospect of some sort of enforcement, though, personally.
And I can't see how
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also sprach Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au [2005.03.11.0158 +0100]:
There's a trivial way: moderate the lists. I think there are less
fascist ways that'll be both effective and more efficient. But
there's no point kidding ourselves that it'll be
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.03.11.1222 +0100]:
Which machines are you talking about?
All those marked as restricted on db.debian.org.
And of course, ftp-master.debian.org and security.debian.org :)
So that was just a bogus comment to keep up
also sprach Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.03.11.1353 +0100]:
And the point is what exactly?
That people who would like to know more about Debian internals have
no easy way of finding out, and if they approach those that know at
the wrong time, or not in the way those would expect, they
Joachim Breitner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Hi,
Am Freitag, den 11.03.2005, 13:14 +0100 schrieb Frank Küster:
However, we should be careful not to make the problem worse instead of
better: We don't gain much if anybody who wants to be informed then
would have to follow -devel *and*
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.03.11.1353 +0100]:
And the point is what exactly?
That people who would like to know more about Debian internals have
no easy way of finding out, and if they approach those that know at
the wrong time, or not in the
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au [2005.03.11.0158 +0100]:
I can't see any way of having polite reminders work without some
sort of statement from the DPL or the listmasters, probably with
the prospect of some sort of enforcement, though, personally.
And I
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
Enforcement of the BTS policy gets a few more flames because it only
happens when people are already being argumentative, and because it's
not a policy people are very well aware of in advance. OTOH, an
argument doesn't stop the policy being
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=224742
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/12/msg01966.html
I have a question about this one. Enrico was abusing the system (from
the bug log, at least, I concur with that judgment). But is it a
coincidence that he
Romain Francoise wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
The debian-release list enforcement policy of politely asking people to
stay on topic has worked quite well and hasn't needed any augmentation.
Isn't it because the RMs have been asking people to treat -release as a
role
* Anthony Towns [Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:52:49 +1000]:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/12/msg01966.html
Hrm. I thought for sure I'd made that clear in that thread, but now I
can't seem to find any evidence of it.
I'm happy to do the same thing for any other maintainer who is being
Adeodato Sim [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Anthony Towns [Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:52:49 +1000]:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/12/msg01966.html
Hrm. I thought for sure I'd made that clear in that thread, but now I
can't seem to find any evidence of it.
I'm happy to do the same
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Adeodato Sim [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Anthony Towns [Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:52:49 +1000]:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/12/msg01966.html
Hrm. I thought for sure I'd made that clear in that thread, but now I
can't seem to find any evidence of it.
I'm happy
On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 04:01:12PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Of course they'll look over whatever bug you claim is being abused. I
don't understand why you'd even imagine it'd be otherwise.
Well, there is a DPL candidate who has, with another role hat on his
head, repeatedly claimed that
martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au [2005.03.03.1827 +0100]:
usual flamewars be declared off topic and either having the thread
killed or, if necessary, the poster suspended.
I am not sure this is a good idea. First off, we're all about
freedom, and what you
also sprach Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au [2005.03.03.1827 +0100]:
If elected DPL I'd aim to remove the list problems by having
delegates lead discussion of problems in their fields of expertise
and having the
This sounds like the delegates would inform the general public of
problems;
also sprach Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au [2005.03.04.2118 +0100]:
I think the communication issues are just a stand in for
complaints of the underlying cause. If they weren't, I think the
new.html page should be more of a solution
... not many people knew about it until recently. And
ke, 2005-03-09 kello 17:07 +0100, Michael Banck kirjoitti:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 03:15:11PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
That said, there is no way to ban flamewars since they are sort of
part of the nature of a project like this.
I do not subscribe to this. Flamewars are *not* a
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 06:56:44PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:16PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for
debian
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 09:53:52AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Eduard Bloch wrote:
Sorry, I did not follow the threads from the beginning, but... whom
should I believe? I inteprett your answers as exactly what Henning
describes. What I miss is a clear statement:
- what is going wrong
- why
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
Frank Küster wrote:
With that hat on, this statement is perfectly acceptable, just as all
the mails you sent about NEW processing. The problem, to me, is that
you fail to see the issue from a different side, and you definitely
*should* as a DPL
Sven Luther wrote:
It's hard to take this sort of discussion as anything but an attack on
ftpmaster, since there are plenty of teams in Debian that're even less
transparent and effective than us. But given how these sorts of
But they are less a hindrance to the daily work of maintainers, and
Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 06:56:44PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
4) furthermore, i believe that, altough it never happened, it could well be
that the BSwhatever agency may also once it reads the notification, reject
the export authorization for a particular package, no ?
No.
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
It's hard to take this sort of discussion as anything but an attack
on ftpmaster, since there are plenty of teams in Debian that're
even less transparent and effective than us. But given how these
sorts of
But they are less a
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
Well, here's a simple train of thought:
(1) Hrm, ftpmaster aren't doing things as quickly as normal.
(2) Gosh, that probably means they're really busy.
(3) I wonder what I could do that would help.
Here's a train of thought that doesn't
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 06:12:03AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
It's hard to take this sort of discussion as anything but an attack on
ftpmaster, since there are plenty of teams in Debian that're even less
transparent and effective than us. But given how these sorts of
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 06:09:00AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Well, here's a simple train of thought:
(1) Hrm, ftpmaster aren't doing things as quickly as normal.
(2) Gosh, that probably means they're really busy.
(3) I wonder what I could do that would help.
Ah, well, in how can we
Frank Küster wrote:
Given I personally worked around the lack of ftpmaster support for
pools for a good six to twelve months while developing testing, I
think I've got a reasonable basis for thinking this isn't such a big
deal.
This work wasn't targetted at users at that stage, was it?
I was using
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au schrieb:
Frank Küster wrote:
Given I personally worked around the lack of ftpmaster support for
pools for a good six to twelve months while developing testing, I
think I've got a reasonable basis for thinking this isn't such a big
deal.
This work wasn't
Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au
Matthew Garrett wrote:
(I'm not suggesting that the ftp-masters are doing their job
inadequately here,
See, that's the thing, you _are_. You can tell, because you had to
explicitly refute the idea; it's the same as being able to
On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 03:02:34PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
I actually think that's a good result: far better to keep track of the
problematic packages, than to just REJECT them with a reason like
doesn't seem like a good idea and have them
#include hallo.h
* Anthony Towns [Mon, Mar 07 2005, 12:34:02AM]:
I'm pretty confident I can find someone who's not me to enforce that
policy who doesn't suffer from that level of infamy, and I'm also pretty
confident that given that policy being actually enforced, that I can
encourage a
Op vr, 04-03-2005 te 21:09 +0100, schreef Sven Luther:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 11:07:06AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
resolves the complaints about NEW and hence I don't think that the NEW
issue is an example of a
On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 11:28:57AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
There's no particular reason NEW isn't being processed -- people are
just busy doing other things; some of which are outside Debian, others
of which are related to getting the release out, or whatever else.
That's not, in my
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 12:52:51PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Op vr, 04-03-2005 te 21:09 +0100, schreef Sven Luther:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 11:07:06AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
resolves the complaints about NEW and
Frank Küster wrote:
With that hat on, this statement is perfectly acceptable, just as all
the mails you sent about NEW processing. The problem, to me, is that
you fail to see the issue from a different side, and you definitely
*should* as a DPL candidate.
As a DPL candidate, you should not
Scripsit Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au
Matthew Garrett wrote:
(I'm not suggesting that the ftp-masters are doing their job
inadequately here,
See, that's the thing, you _are_. You can tell, because you had to
explicitly refute the idea; it's the same as being able to tell you're
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050305 09:00]:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:16PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian
is
reported to the US secret services or whatever by
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 08:48:21AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:16PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian
is
reported to the US secret services or
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yep, but there is a difference between the information being
available, and it being actively feeded to the NSA or whoever. And
it is especially bothering if this cause undue delay in our normal
activities, like aj is saying it is.
Tough. It's *public*.
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:02:36AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050305 09:00]:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:16PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:55:25PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian is
reported to the US secret services or whatever by the ftp-masters and our
archive handling services, and i certainly did *NOT* agree to
On Saturday 05 March 2005 10:59, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:55:25PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian
is reported to the US secret services or whatever by the ftp-masters
and our
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:18:37PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Matthew Garrett wrote:
3) My package has been sitting in the queue for ages and other packages
have been processed
This is a communication problem.
No, this is a policy problem. Communication is easy: hit M for manual
reject,
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's rumours on debian-devel that NEW processing is actual on hold
(by decision rather than by default) but that wasn't communicated. Of
course it may be false
It is false.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2005/03/msg00019.html
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So what ? You are one of us, and not a potentially hostile outside agency.
PUBLIC. That means not only to us, but to hostile things too.
Hostile things like the US Government, or *really* hostile things like
the governments of France and China.
--
To
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 11:33:43PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 09:27:36AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Steve Langasek wrote:
As someone who is
both an ftpmaster and a DPL candidate, could you also tell us what
resources you (or the ftpmasters as a
Sven Luther wrote:
Well, i guess people get rather irritated if sending email to ftp-master email
address for things that are mostly reasonable could as well go to /dev/null,
Sure, of course they are, and so they should be. I can fairly readily
find 52k more reasons for people to be irritated
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
resolves the complaints about NEW and hence I don't think that the NEW
issue is an example of a communication problem at all.
This is getting slightly too detailed discussion for a DPL, but
anyway: what do you think the NEW issue is an example of?
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:29:58AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
Well, i guess people get rather irritated if sending email to ftp-master
email
address for things that are mostly reasonable could as well go to
/dev/null,
Sure, of course they are, and so they should be. I
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
As a concrete example, I don't think
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
resolves the complaints about NEW and hence I don't think that the NEW
issue is an example of a communication problem at all.
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
anyway: what do you think the NEW issue is an example of?
Not having enough time in the day.
The resolutions to that are:
(a) reprioritising things
(b) making more time available
(c) making things take less time
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 11:28:16AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
And again to my purely technical question. Is it really necessary for
kernel-source-2.6.11 to go through NEW once it is uploaded for example ?
It's not a technical issue it's a legal one -- our approach to
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Erm, ftpmaster hat, I guess.
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au wrote:
As a concrete example, I don't think
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
resolves the complaints about NEW and hence I don't think that the NEW
issue is an example of a communication problem at
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 11:07:06AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
resolves the complaints about NEW and hence I don't think that the NEW
issue is an example of a communication problem at all.
This is getting slightly too detailed
Sven Luther wrote:
I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian is
reported to the US secret services or whatever by the ftp-masters and our
archive handling services, and i certainly did *NOT* agree to this being the
case.
Everyone subscribed to debian-devel-changes
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian is
reported to the US secret services or whatever by the ftp-masters and our
archive handling services, and i certainly did *NOT* agree to this being the
case.
What are you talking
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 09:09:50PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 11:07:06AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
resolves the complaints about NEW and hence I don't think that the NEW
issue is an example of a
Steve Langasek wrote:
As someone who is
both an ftpmaster and a DPL candidate, could you also tell us what
resources you (or the ftpmasters as a group, if you believe it's
appropriate to speak for them) would appreciate?
The most valuable thing I can think of would be to not have to have some
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 09:27:36AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
Steve Langasek wrote:
As someone who is
both an ftpmaster and a DPL candidate, could you also tell us what
resources you (or the ftpmasters as a group, if you believe it's
appropriate to speak for them) would appreciate?
The
Hi Anthony,
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 07:41:09PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
I would like to know from the DPL candidates what is their opinion on way
the
ftp-masters handle the NEW queue,
I think this is the wrong question. The right question to ask is what
the ftpmasters think of the way
68 matches
Mail list logo
