Re: EFF Privacy; hopefully Ubuntu will listen to users

2012-11-07 Thread Aurélien Naldi
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 4:28 PM, C de-Avillez hgg...@ubuntu.com wrote: On 05/11/12 09:08, Jordon Bedwell wrote: This is from my perspective though and I have not really followed all too closely since I am the type of person to remove what I don't want and block stuff like Canonical's NTP

Re: EFF Privacy; hopefully Ubuntu will listen to users

2012-11-07 Thread Colin Watson
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 03:28:44PM +, J Fernyhough wrote: I'm currently looking into how Ubuntu meets the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998, and more crucially what would need to be done to meet the requirements, so that I have some base of evidence and legal reasoning to put

Re: EFF Privacy; hopefully Ubuntu will listen to users

2012-11-07 Thread J Fernyhough
On 5 November 2012 15:35, Martin Albisetti be...@ubuntu.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 12:28 PM, J Fernyhough j.fernyho...@gmail.com wrote: (As an aside, it appears that being only enthusiastic about Ubuntu and all decisions, or at least getting in line, is a requisite for employment

Re: EFF Privacy; hopefully Ubuntu will listen to users

2012-11-07 Thread J Fernyhough
On 7 November 2012 15:23, Colin Watson cjwat...@ubuntu.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 03:28:44PM +, J Fernyhough wrote: I'm currently looking into how Ubuntu meets the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998, and more crucially what would need to be done to meet the requirements, so

Re: EFF Privacy; hopefully Ubuntu will listen to users

2012-11-07 Thread Didier Roche
Le 07/11/2012 17:16, J Fernyhough a écrit : On 7 November 2012 15:23, Colin Watson cjwat...@ubuntu.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 03:28:44PM +, J Fernyhough wrote: I'm currently looking into how Ubuntu meets the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998, and more crucially what would

package dependencies on versions

2012-11-07 Thread Enrico Weigelt
Hi folks, I could use some little assistance in packaging and version dependencies. My remdine source package creates a bunch of binary packages: * 'redmine': metapackage pulling in redmine-core and one redmine-pgsql, redmine-mysql or redmine-sql * 'redmine-core': the actual redmine code *

Re: Thinking about SRU

2012-11-07 Thread Benjamin Drung
Am Sonntag, den 28.10.2012, 21:48 -0500 schrieb Ma Xiaojun: SRU stands for Stable Release Updates: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates I think the When list may need some additions. Probably everyone wants latest version if she happens to notice the difference between upstream

Re: CMake and Ruby1.9 for Ubuntu 12.04 LTS

2012-11-07 Thread Benjamin Drung
Am Samstag, den 27.10.2012, 14:36 +0200 schrieb Chris Müller: Hi, We have some problems with the current cmake version on the Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Distribution that can't find ruby1.9 libraries. A simple find_package(Ruby) in a CMakeLists.txt throws the follow error (Though ruby1.9-dev is

Re: CMake and Ruby1.9 for Ubuntu 12.04 LTS

2012-11-07 Thread Benjamin Drung
Am Samstag, den 03.11.2012, 02:28 -0500 schrieb Ma Xiaojun: Though newer software is generally better I disagree. A new software version can bring new features, but also a lot of new bugs. There are even examples of new version that reduces the functionality to simplify the program. [...] and

Re: Thinking about SRU

2012-11-07 Thread Ma Xiaojun
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Benjamin Drung bdr...@ubuntu.com wrote: This is covered by point four of the When section: Bugs which do not fit under above categories, but (1) have an obviously safe patch and (2) affect an application rather than critical infrastructure packages (like X.org

Re: CMake and Ruby1.9 for Ubuntu 12.04 LTS

2012-11-07 Thread Ma Xiaojun
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Benjamin Drung bdr...@ubuntu.com wrote: I disagree. A new software version can bring new features, but also a lot of new bugs. There are even examples of new version that reduces the functionality to simplify the program. True. Nautilus 3.6 is a notable example.