Re: Proposal F on the ballot now.
On Thu, 27 May 2004 08:05:56 -0400, Raul Miller <email@example.com> said:
> On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 01:24:56PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> Yes; but it is not, nor has it ever been, part of a released
> The proposal we're currently talking about
> (http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/05/msg00440.html) doesn't
> specify whether it's talking about the operating/application/...?
> system provided by sarge, whether it's talking about the sarge main
> distribution, whether it's talking about the sarge parts of our
> archives, or whether it's talking about the parts of sarge which are
> pure programs.
> We can conclude, from context, that it's probably not talking about
> the parts of Sarge which are pure programs, but I see nothing to
> eliminate any of the other possibilities.
It is called common sense.
I am in the process of putting up aptable dirs on public.d.o,
which you can put in your sources.list. I am planning on putting up
CVS versions of tome in there -- the nightly builds. Are you saying
that that shall, in your opinion, hold up sarge forever if we
resolve to follow the curtrect SC? That it shall hold up sarge
forever if we resolve not to compromise on freedom?
You really think the proposal F is irreconcilliable with the
The curse of the Irish is not that they don't know the words to a song
-- it's that they know them *___all*. Susan Dooley
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C