[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: General Resolution: Handling of the non-free section: proposedBallot

On 2004-03-08 12:33:25 +0000 Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

And not always thanks to debian-legal, which wanted me to go to upstream
about the QPLed emacs .el issue with the argument of : "we should be
polite to RMS".

That is a gross misreporting of Brian Thomas Sniffen's advice to you, which was explained in some detail. Some -legal contributors still helped you despite your attacks on them ("I have not known a more rude bunch of people than the debian developers"), confusion between acts of different developers ("the current tentative to remove non-free as a threat to upstream authors" when BTS wrote he thought it better not to threaten upstream) and trying to provoke debian-legal into confrontations ("This is debian-legal, not debian-please-stay-polite"). You seemed to be trying to make debian-legal behave as your post today said they do, rather than how they really are. Remember that debian-legal is a mailing list of many developers and other contributors, not a single person.

That thread starts at http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/debian-legal-200401/msg00088.html in case anyone wants to "lose time" seeing how Sven misleads -vote readers again. I didn't read it all, but I still remember it from the time. I didn't post in that thread: I don't want to lose so much time to Sven Luther.

MJR/slef     My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ slef@jabber.at
 Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/

Reply to: