On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 12:15:57PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 03:53:17PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > > Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > > > And most DDs have also stopped paying any attention to -legal, so ... > > > > I challenge you to provide data, but it's actually irrelevant, > > as long as we assist those who want our assistence. debian-legal > > is mostly welcoming and willing to help with debian packages. Many > > contributors are actually willing to help with general topics, > > although some would be better on other lists such as -mentors. > > Though I am interested in being involved in debian-legal, I am turned > off by Andrew Suffield's description of anyone with a view other than > his own as an "anti-freedom advocate". No, there's a small group running around advocating knowingly putting non-free stuff into main (plus variations on the theme). Not even trying to claim that it's free, just trying to claim that it doesn't matter (I find it baffling that they would have anything to do with Debian in the first place; yes, it is as absurd as it sounds). > Branden posted the list of debian-legal's top 10 posters in > http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2005/03/msg00249.html > 4 of the top 6 posters are not developers (according to db.d.o). > Are they professional trouble-makers? Bear in mind that list is somewhat confusing. I appear high on it because I habitually send large numbers of extremely short mails, rather than small numbers of obscenely long ones. I expect some of the others are similar artifacts. It doesn't mean a great deal beyond the point he was making at the time; it's not a serious measure of activity. On the other hand, I note that a couple of them are in my killfile. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature