Re: GR proposal: give up on declassifying debian-private (Re: General Resolution: Declassifying debian-private results)
Just found out about Gunnar's proposal in the debian-vote archive, so I
am seconding Gunnar's proposal from [🔎] 20160902041505.GD3030@gwolf.org
Ondřej Surý <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Knot DNS (https://www.knot-dns.cz/) – a high-performance DNS server
Knot Resolver (https://www.knot-resolver.cz/) – secure, privacy-aware,
fast DNS(SEC) resolver
Vše pro chleba (https://vseprochleba.cz) – Potřeby pro pečení chleba
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016, at 09:33, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016, at 16:15, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > Hi,
> > so, as previously announced I hereby like to propose to hold another GR
> > to revert the decission of
> > https://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002.en.html as the last 11 years
> > have shown, that noone is willing to do the work and that it would be
> > very difficult up to impractical or unethical, as too many people writing
> > on debian-private do no allow declassification of their contributions.
> > Despite the results of https://www.debian.org/vote/2016/vote_002 I think
> > we should vote on three options:
> > a.) we want to declassify email@example.com
> > b.) we give up on this and revert
> > https://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002.en.html
> > c.) further discussion.
> > I don't think omitting option a.) is a good idea, even though we just
> > voted that we prefer c.) over a.) ;-)
> > I'm hereby looking for people seconding this proposal so the secretary
> > can start the voting process properly.
> Ondřej Surý <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Knot DNS (https://www.knot-dns.cz/) – a high-performance DNS server
> Knot Resolver (https://www.knot-resolver.cz/) – secure, privacy-aware,
> fast DNS(SEC) resolver
> Vše pro chleba (https://vseprochleba.cz) – Potřeby pro pečení chleba
> všeho druhu
> > Last and least, *please* respect the reply-to: header and *do not* send
> > your reply to -private nor -project. (And I'm not subscribed to
> > debian-vote@ldo).
> If only Fastmail allowed that :(, argh.