The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: dpkg/dselect development

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Klee Dienes wrote:

> Ian Jackson writes:
> 
> > I think this is an excellent idea.  Klee, you have the job.  
> > If you don't want to deal with certain difficult technical issues feel free
> > to farm them out, but particularly with the separation of the
> > dependency-checking code I'd like to have a veto over the choice of
> > implementor.
> 
> Great!  Glad to hear it.  I'll post a list of my plans and current
> priorities for dpkg/dselect early next week for debate.  I plan to
> spend the rest of the weekend closing out bugs against my current
> packages so I can start the job with a clean slate, and so I can take
> some time to go through the old mailing-list discussions and bug list
> to get a better sense of the current state of affairs.
> 
> I'd appreciate it if anyone currently working on projects related to
> dpkg/dselect would send me a short description of what they're working
> on and how far they've gotten, as well as things they might be
> interested in working on and any appropriate qualifications they might
> have.

I've automakized+libtoolized it, and gettextized (updated Galen's
patches). Totally finished, but still some very minor bugs.

> I have no problem giving you (Ian) veto power over the choice of
> implementor for the separation of the dependency routines into a
> separate library.  My guess is that I'm going to end up doing that
> part myself, but I'd be happy to receive offers from anyone else who
> might be interested.

I would be - having already done quite a bit of examination on the
appropriate code, I am fairly able to do this.

> With your permission, I'd also like to (at least in the beginning)
> send a short summary of any code changes I plan to make (even minor
> ones) for your review, so I can make sure that I'm not missing any
> design assumptions or subtleties that might not be immediately
> apparent from the code.  Does that sound reasonable to you, at least
> in the beginning?

Please post this to debian-private.

- -- 
Tom Lees <tom@lpsg.demon.co.uk>			http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/
PGP ID 87D4D065, fingerprint 2A 66 86 9D 02 4D A6 1E  B8 A2 17 9D 4F 9B 89 D6
finger tom@master.debian.org for full public key (also available on keyservers)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBMyBPn/152HGH1NBlAQGQQQP+LyMNJdd/PTo9IqNmv5xvbDUQy4SSJmU1
GgGxYrJavYL7qW5bqQpr3oUGzT01SpYeZDF5kHGxhs64NkyX57ozNLfv3oL0ByJs
cJR4Ueg9hRfxWy1zehhoSfT7Q+1LXqJRyApyQTdhFrWGN4ahO8nCAFqtha7gpDN+
CzasPZFs28o=
=7VQn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----