On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:33:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
it's somehow OK for you to complain about my occasional, in-context and
grammatically-correct use of certain English words, but it is *NOT OK* for
me to make any complaint about
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:24:49PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
Moreover, the fact that you don't like something--even if it's something
bad--does not justify your use of language.
i'll use any fucking language i like, whether you like it or not.
and the more you try to tell me i do not
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:35:43PM +1100, Pascal Hakim wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:24:49PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
Moreover, the fact that you don't like something--even if it's something
bad--does not justify your use of language.
i'll use any fucking language i like,
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:32:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You've got a bad habit of missing the point made in an email, then
trimming it so that no one else can see the point either.
If so, it's not intentional, and please correct it.
I
On 2004-03-11 04:58:02 + Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Personally, I find swearing much less offensive than making things so
personal that you title threads with things like Serious problems
with
Mr Troup or Why Anthony Towns is wrong. [...]
Acutally, it seems common that debian
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 06:56:03PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm referring to the sub threads where people ask what non-free has that
anyone needs.
Oh, I figure they're just ignorant--and likely to be unaware of what
vrms would say on their
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:29:34PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:36:52PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
See, there you go again. It's not part of the Debian distribution;
but it's certainly part of the Debian
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 08:37:20PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
I don't know if that's sufficient, but I know that it can do a lot to
make the meek feel more welcome, to know that people will stand up.
Except that proposing foundational document ammendments is not for the meek.
If someone
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 06:56:03PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
So why is mpg123 in the non-free area anymore? Is anyone willing to
say it's necessary? And if not, why didn't it get dropped sooner?
It's necessary for Asterisk music-on-hold, because mpg321 can't resample its
output.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 06:50:05PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
No. You only proposed to start with the debian-keyring, and did not
promise not to diverge from it in the future. Debian has an NM
procedure and team which I've grown to trust, but an
NM-for-non-free.org process would have to gain
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:24:49PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
it is not up to you to tell me HOW i may say something.
i'll use whatever words i feel are necessary to get my point across. if you
don't like some of the words that i choose to employ, then tough luck - get a life.
Craig,
It
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 05:27:24PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
I guess it's been decided that Debian doesn't care to stop the bullying
and outrageously abusive language.
No; mostly we just file craig sanders' mail in /dev/null.
--
- mdz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:50:14AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-11 10:48:54 + Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Trying to talk to people without referring to people directly makes
things unnecessarily difficult. Avoiding making individuals the focus of a
thread is both more
hi ted, craig,
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:58:58AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
Craig,
snip
Thomas asked the mailing list as a whole if they thought your style of
discourse was acceptable. A number of responsible have responded that
they thought it was not acceptable. I will join that number.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 02:58:02PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Personally, I find swearing much less offensive than making things so
personal that you title threads with things like Serious problems with
Mr Troup or Why Anthony Towns is wrong. But you don't seem interested
in doing anything
* Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 22:16]:
wonder if the candidates might turn to the following for a moment:
Are there circumstances, other than a violation of the DMUP or
inactivity, for which a maintainer should be excluded from the
Project? Should we think about having
* Gustavo Noronha Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 14:19]:
Do you think Debian should work more pro-activelly in supporting
free hardware initiatives? Do you think Debian money could be
invested in such initiatives? What, if elected, you plan to do with
respect to bringind Debian closer to
* Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 20:34]:
And you seriously thing that a non-free.org, being setup by debian
people in the wake of the non-free removal vote, will not be
considered as having official endorsement, especially given the
opinion of at least two of the three DPL
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-09 00:57]:
In fact, Martin criticized me last year for not having novel ideas:
[..]
Note that he didn't say he thought they were bad ideas; instead he
asserted that I would be ineffective at achieving them.
Yes, and I still assert the same. As I
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-09 01:07]:
I fully agree with you that it's important to follow the documented
procedure when leaving the project, but I don't think you're going
to persuade more people to avoid silently idling out by
threatening some sort of denigrated status.
* Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-11 15:24]:
My concern is that we find a DPL who is *honest* and *enthusiastic*
about the future they see for the project and who is prepared to
share that vision unabashedly with anyone who will listen.
What I'm seeing (again) from the two mainstream
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 06:10:28PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
Furthermore, partly in line with AJ said, while your communication has
significantly improved, I wonder why it had to improve in the first
place? I have never been known for flamewars, and most people know me
as approachable,
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:15:02PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I think the Technical Committee is mostly not working because of its
current members; this is related to the structure of the Technical
Committee and the way members are appointed. As I have argued in
another posting, I don't
* Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-11 13:52]:
But, even more important than individual interactions is energy and
drive.
That's what I'm still trying to figure out about the both of you.
I can only invite you to look at the work I've done for Debian over
the last years. You'll see a
* Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-11 14:23]:
So... what is it that you think the technical committee should be doing?
Also, why do you think it should be the technical committee doing these
things?
I think what the Technical Committee should be doing is rather well
explained in the
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:06:52PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I think what the Technical Committee should be doing is rather well
explained in the Constituion. As I said, I think the Technical
Committee should be a fall-back rather than a general-purpose solution
- most issues should be
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:05:04PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I can only invite you to look at the work I've done for Debian over
the last years. You'll see a high level of commitment and energy.
I don't doubt that -- I'm definitely ranking you above the default option.
But, I still have
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 12:36:19PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 02:58:02PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Personally, I find swearing much less offensive than making things so
personal that you title threads with things like Serious problems with
Mr Troup or Why Anthony
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
you are claiming that it is OK for you to use pedantic idiocy to
complain about my swearing but it is not OK for me to use swearing to
complain about your pedantic idiocy.
Well, I don't think I'm saying something pedantic or idiotic.
But
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:32:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You've got a bad habit of missing the point made in an email, then
trimming it so that no one else can see the point either.
If so, it's
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 06:22:33PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
alas, that doesn't happen on mailing lists. instead, it goes on for
weeks or months until it pisses somebody off enough to finally say
something about it - unfortunately
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Did you fill a bug report against mpg123 asking for just that ?
Is it a bug? Currently, there is no sense in my mind in which
unnecessarly in non-free constitutes a bug. We have no policy, of
any kind, which says that only necessary things should be in
On 10 Mar 2004 11:25:51 -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Necessary for what purpose?
We can work out the details of what is the standard of necessity. I
already gave some suggestions that I might accept: hardware drivers
for closed
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:58:58AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:24:49PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
it is not up to you to tell me HOW i may say something.
i'll use whatever words i feel are necessary to get my point across. if
you don't like some of the words
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 12:14:35 +1100, Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 06:55:38PM -0600, Debian Project Secretary
wrote:
-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[ ] Choice 1: Cease active support of non-free [3:1 majority needed]
[ ]
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:08:00 +1100, Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 08:47:37PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
It's impossible to enforce a STFU about it option.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:51:49AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
similarly, it's impossible to enforce a
On 08 Mar 2004 13:49:57 -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:46:42AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG
wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If i am stopped from maintaining the driver for the ADSL modem
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 08:22:15 +0100, Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:46:42AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG
wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If i am stopped from maintaining the driver for the ADSL modem
that provides me
On 2004-03-11 15:33:10 + Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:50:14AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-11 10:48:54 + Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[...] Avoiding making individuals the focus of
a thread is both more obnoxious, and easier to avoid
On 2004-03-11 19:20:41 + Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
non-free.org is vapourware, and god know what standards of
quality it shall have; Debian does have a certain reputation
for quality that purely hypothetical organizations have difficulty
in matching.
Having just
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 03:20:45PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
True, but -- I don't think that either of those subject lines are really
slanderous. For instance, the Why Anthony Towns is wrong should
probably have read Why Anthony Towns' *Argument* is wrong -- which
simply uses Anthony's name
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 03:20:45PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
True, but -- I don't think that either of those subject lines are really
slanderous.
The question isn't whether it's libellous; it's whether it's a productive
way of having a conversation.
For instance, the Why Anthony Towns is
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 12:01:32AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-11 15:33:10 + Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:50:14AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-11 10:48:54 + Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[...] Avoiding making individuals the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
But regardless, yes, it is allowed to be a pedantic idiot.
Indeed, it's almost a tradition...
-Miles
--
I distrust a research person who is always obviously busy on a task.
--Robert Frosch, VP, GM Research
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 06:25:47PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-11 15:24]:
My concern is that we find a DPL who is *honest* and *enthusiastic*
about the future they see for the project and who is prepared to
share that vision unabashedly with anyone who
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 19:15:02 +, Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I think the Technical Committee is mostly not working because of its
current members; this is related to the structure of the Technical
Committee and the way members are appointed.
I see. As a tech ctte
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:33:37 +, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On 2004-03-11 19:20:41 + Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
non-free.org is vapourware, and god know what standards of quality
it shall have; Debian does have a certain reputation for quality
that purely
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
Well, you have it within your power to do what Craig asks, which he
indicates will stop him from swearing. Do you find those requests --
ie, to talk about real issues, not pedantic non-events -- unacceptable?
He can make whatever requests he wants,
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:34:26PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 05:29:22PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Despite all that Branden has ever done, Craig Sanders just unleashed a
stream of unacceptable noise.
Sorry, you'll
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:36:52PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
See, there you go again. It's not part of the Debian distribution;
but it's certainly part of the Debian project. Saying categorically and
without clarification that non-free isn't part of Debian is exactly
as bad as
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 02:58:02PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Personally, I find swearing much less offensive than making things so
personal that you title threads with things like Serious problems with
Mr Troup or Why Anthony Towns is wrong. But you don't seem interested
in doing anything
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:36:52PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
See, there you go again. It's not part of the Debian distribution;
but it's certainly part of the Debian project. Saying categorically and
without clarification that
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 03:43:47PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:38:47PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
I suspect some of our users might not want to use packages from a
less trusted source. I would have concerns myself.
Of course, and this was indeed one the prime
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 10:01:24PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
This is exactly what I mean when I say that the compromise embedded in
section 5 of the SC has broken down. That compromise allows for
non-free to be hosted on Debian, but also says it is not a part of
Debian.
Again, it
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:33:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
it's somehow OK for you to complain about my occasional, in-context and
grammatically-correct use of certain English words, but it is *NOT OK* for
me to make any complaint about
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:24:49PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
Moreover, the fact that you don't like something--even if it's something
bad--does not justify your use of language.
i'll use any fucking language i like, whether you like it or not.
and the more you try to tell me i do not
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:32:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
You've got a bad habit of missing the point made in an email, then
trimming it so that no one else can see the point either.
If so, it's not intentional, and please correct it.
On 2004-03-11 08:24:49 + Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you are also elevating the significance of something YOU claim not to
like
(swearing) to the status of Universal Truth
I suspect far more people dislike swearing. Subscribers are even asked
not to use foul language on
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:29:34PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:36:52PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
See, there you go again. It's not part of the Debian distribution;
but it's certainly part of the
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:43:45PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
being stupid in public isn't polite, either, but it doesn't stop most people.
QED.
Michael
--
Michael Banck
Debian Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.advogato.org/person/mbanck/diary.html
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:32:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
You've got a bad habit of missing the point made in an email, then
trimming it so that no one else can see the point either.
If so, it's not intentional, and please correct
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:02:49AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Also, i will not speak again about this, since it is evident that you
asked us, me and aj nominally, to use clearer language on this, and
refuse to do the same, playing on the confusion.
And now that you are aware of that, please
eManager Notification *
The following mail was blocked since it contains sensitive content.
Source mailbox: debian-vote@lists.debian.org
Destination mailbox(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Policy: Attachment Removal
Attachment file name: document_4351.pif -
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:38:08AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:02:49AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Also, i will not speak again about this, since it is evident that you
asked us, me and aj nominally, to use clearer language on this, and
refuse to do the same,
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:59:26AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:38:08AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:02:49AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Also, i will not speak again about this, since it is evident that you
asked us, me and aj nominally, to
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 09:18:52AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-11 04:58:02 + Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au
wrote:
Personally, I find swearing much less offensive than making things so
personal that you title threads with things like Serious problems
with
Mr Troup or Why
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 08:37:20PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
I don't know if that's sufficient, but I know that it can do a lot to
make the meek feel more welcome, to know that people will stand up.
Except that proposing foundational document ammendments is not for the meek.
If someone
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 06:50:05PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
No. You only proposed to start with the debian-keyring, and did not
promise not to diverge from it in the future. Debian has an NM
procedure and team which I've grown to trust, but an
NM-for-non-free.org process would have to gain
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:24:49PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
it is not up to you to tell me HOW i may say something.
i'll use whatever words i feel are necessary to get my point across. if you
don't like some of the words that i choose to employ, then tough luck - get a
life.
Craig,
It
Hallo, Andy
Thank You for Your kind and patient answer. I'll think about
possibilities of trying testing release.
It couldn't harm if there'll be some easier-to-install, quite functional
testing, however :o)
The most problems I have had were: freezing installer, unresolvable ways
of
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 05:27:24PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
I guess it's been decided that Debian doesn't care to stop the bullying
and outrageously abusive language.
No; mostly we just file craig sanders' mail in /dev/null.
--
- mdz
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:50:14AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
On 2004-03-11 10:48:54 + Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au
wrote:
Trying to talk to people without referring to people directly makes
things unnecessarily difficult. Avoiding making individuals the focus of a
thread is both
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:43:45PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
wrong. i will say what i please when i please.
Which pretty much adresses your point about getting people to STFU.
--
Raul
hi ted, craig,
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:58:58AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
Craig,
snip
Thomas asked the mailing list as a whole if they thought your style of
discourse was acceptable. A number of responsible have responded that
they thought it was not acceptable. I will join that number.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 02:58:02PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Personally, I find swearing much less offensive than making things so
personal that you title threads with things like Serious problems with
Mr Troup or Why Anthony Towns is wrong. But you don't seem interested
in doing anything
* Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 22:16]:
wonder if the candidates might turn to the following for a moment:
Are there circumstances, other than a violation of the DMUP or
inactivity, for which a maintainer should be excluded from the
Project? Should we think about having
* Gustavo Noronha Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 14:19]:
Do you think Debian should work more pro-activelly in supporting
free hardware initiatives? Do you think Debian money could be
invested in such initiatives? What, if elected, you plan to do with
respect to bringind Debian closer to
* Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-08 20:34]:
And you seriously thing that a non-free.org, being setup by debian
people in the wake of the non-free removal vote, will not be
considered as having official endorsement, especially given the
opinion of at least two of the three DPL
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-09 00:57]:
In fact, Martin criticized me last year for not having novel ideas:
[..]
Note that he didn't say he thought they were bad ideas; instead he
asserted that I would be ineffective at achieving them.
Yes, and I still assert the same. As I
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-09 01:07]:
I fully agree with you that it's important to follow the documented
procedure when leaving the project, but I don't think you're going
to persuade more people to avoid silently idling out by
threatening some sort of denigrated status.
* Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-11 15:24]:
My concern is that we find a DPL who is *honest* and *enthusiastic*
about the future they see for the project and who is prepared to
share that vision unabashedly with anyone who will listen.
What I'm seeing (again) from the two mainstream
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 06:10:28PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
Furthermore, partly in line with AJ said, while your communication has
significantly improved, I wonder why it had to improve in the first
place? I have never been known for flamewars, and most people know me
as approachable,
On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 00:14, Craig Sanders wrote:
but i forget - certain words in the English language are allegedly beyond the
pale, they are a magically perfect excuse for ignoring the actual substance of
what someone has to say and to instead concentrate on whining about a few
choice
* Stephen Stafford [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-07 23:42]:
Your platform[3] contains a lot of references to your organisational
skills and your people skills. I appreciate that last year you
attended a lot of conferences too. You *do* mention transparency
and accountability as well, but you're
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:15:02PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I think the Technical Committee is mostly not working because of its
current members; this is related to the structure of the Technical
Committee and the way members are appointed. As I have argued in
another posting, I don't
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:22:37AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
alas, that doesn't happen on mailing lists. instead, it goes on for
weeks or months until it pisses somebody off enough to finally say
something about it - unfortunately triggering another round of
pedantic
* Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-11 13:52]:
But, even more important than individual interactions is energy and
drive.
That's what I'm still trying to figure out about the both of you.
I can only invite you to look at the work I've done for Debian over
the last years. You'll see a
* Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-11 14:23]:
So... what is it that you think the technical committee should be doing?
Also, why do you think it should be the technical committee doing these
things?
I think what the Technical Committee should be doing is rather well
explained in the
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:06:52PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I think what the Technical Committee should be doing is rather well
explained in the Constituion. As I said, I think the Technical
Committee should be a fall-back rather than a general-purpose solution
- most issues should be
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:05:04PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I can only invite you to look at the work I've done for Debian over
the last years. You'll see a high level of commitment and energy.
I don't doubt that -- I'm definitely ranking you above the default option.
But, I still have
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 12:36:19PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 02:58:02PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Personally, I find swearing much less offensive than making things so
personal that you title threads with things like Serious problems with
Mr Troup or Why Anthony
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
you are claiming that it is OK for you to use pedantic idiocy to
complain about my swearing but it is not OK for me to use swearing to
complain about your pedantic idiocy.
Well, I don't think I'm saying something pedantic or idiotic.
But
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:32:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
You've got a bad habit of missing the point made in an email, then
trimming it so that no one else can see the point either.
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 06:22:33PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
alas, that doesn't happen on mailing lists. instead, it goes on for
weeks or months until it pisses somebody off enough to finally say
something about it - unfortunately
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Whether cas actually crossed the line in the amount of profanity, that's
debatable, but the let's make everything better for the meek program
just isn't relevant to it.
Debatable? The mailing list policy prohibits swearing.
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Did you fill a bug report against mpg123 asking for just that ?
Is it a bug? Currently, there is no sense in my mind in which
unnecessarly in non-free constitutes a bug. We have no policy, of
any kind, which says that only necessary things should be in
On 10 Mar 2004 11:25:51 -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Necessary for what purpose?
We can work out the details of what is the standard of necessity. I
already gave some suggestions that I might accept: hardware drivers
for closed
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:58:58AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:24:49PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
it is not up to you to tell me HOW i may say something.
i'll use whatever words i feel are necessary to get my point across. if
you don't like some of the words
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 12:14:35 +1100, Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 06:55:38PM -0600, Debian Project Secretary
wrote:
-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[ ] Choice 1: Cease active support of non-free [3:1 majority needed]
[ ]
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:08:00 +1100, Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 08:47:37PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
It's impossible to enforce a STFU about it option.
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:51:49AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
similarly, it's impossible to enforce a
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
