RE: some talk
Dear Michael,
1. Jeremy told me that for now if we want to make any such changes in
the static webpage, we could just tar up the changes and send them to
him, and he could upload it from her CVS-write account.
I think that a webpage in Debian server
(http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-lex/) is better than the Wiki...
but I agree that few people should have permission to write (Andreas
could help us?) in order to avoid disturbing Jeremy and others DD with
the changes...
2. See that. http://blends.alioth.debian.org/lex/tasks/index We can
work on this.
3. We have also a debian-lex page in alioth:
http://alioth.debian.org/projects/debian-lex with a CVS, FTP and other
resources (like sourceforge). (I have write access, if you're
interested, sign in and Jeremy will grant you access)
Regards,
Jose
2012/5/30, Michael Guck <debian-lex@guck.biz>:
> I all,
>
>> - Decide on the website and improve it (Wiki or debian.org/devel/
> debian-lex, I prefer latest).
>
> We could first use a wiki in which we catch up all thoughts and possible
> contents easily and dynamically without to many check-ups, this could be
> "debian.org/devel/" but we should all have permission.
> The "debian-lex" is in my opinion a more static page, on which we could
> publish milestone work, for this at least a few people should have
> permission to write, as there should always be one person who can do
> changes in short time if there is a need and as we all have jobs it
> should be more then one person.
>
>> - Make documentation and tutorials about debian and free software for
> lawyers.
>> - Choosing packages that could integrate future distribution.
> Indeed, and first thing we could do is working towards a first lean
> international release, here we could first evaluate / catch up all
> possible LawFLOSS and then decide which we could need for a common version.
>
> Meanwhile I had some thoughts about document type standards, we should
> establish a system in which we can support different
> national/international standards by using these standards directly and
> additional defining which standard was used. But this is not so easy as
> the thought of it, some meta-decriptions are not defined explicitly, but
> they come with the system of relations to other definitions. So we
> should priorly use already given standards. But there are many subjects
> without any standards, so we should introduce our own standard which
> will be used, when no other standard is used. Priority to use already
> given standards means, that we might need bridges for FLOSS adaptions to
> different nation versions, but the best would be to implement multiple
> standards directly in the software, which is mostly not in our
> responsibility.
>
>> -As far as I have understood Debian teams there is no application for
> a leading position.
>
> Many lawyers who are able to help us won´t have the necessary developer
> status and doing hard work here would be easier if there is some kind of
> rock in the see. I see the need for leaking up the restricting debian
> community rules a bit. This might be okay in this special law sphere, as
> we have only very very few people which understand the both worlds and
> should be needed especially at the beginning. Otherwise it would be
> easier for many people to run their own projects, which would
> pragmatically not be good for all at the end, when source code gets lost
> over years and so on.
>
> Greetings
> Michael
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-lex-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: [🔎] 4FC5E351.20600@guck.biz">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 4FC5E351.20600@guck.biz
>
>
Reply to: