From nobody at repo.parabola.nu Thu Apr 2 13:53:50 2015 From: nobody at repo.parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 13:53:50 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [iceweasel] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20150402135350.350.74488@parabola.nu> pejakm at autistici.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * iceweasel 1:36.0.4.deb1-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/iceweasel/ * iceweasel 1:36.0.4.deb1-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/iceweasel/ * iceweasel-debug 1:36.0.4.deb1-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/iceweasel-debug/ * iceweasel-debug 1:36.0.4.deb1-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/iceweasel-debug/ The user provided the following additional text: https://packages.debian.org/experimental/iceweasel From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Thu Apr 9 19:19:13 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:19:13 -0300 Subject: [Dev] donations page on the wiki + faircoin + cryptocoins Message-ID: <877ftl6rf2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> i just put up the donations page with a faircoin address i've created on my wallet. https://wiki.parabola.nu/Donations faircoop is donation 1,000 FAIR to non-profit projects, we just have to make an announcement on our site and send it to them via email[0]. do you think we can copy that page on parabolaweb as an announcement? what other cryptocoins can we use? BTC is the most used but lately i've seen many issues with it, should we use it? [0]: https://fair.coop/faircoop-donates-100-000-faircoins/ -- .o?) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Fri Apr 10 03:27:06 2015 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Andr=E9_Silva?=) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 00:27:06 -0300 Subject: [Dev] donations page on the wiki + faircoin + cryptocoins In-Reply-To: <877ftl6rf2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <877ftl6rf2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <5527430A.5030106@riseup.net> On 04/09/2015 04:19 PM, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: > > i just put up the donations page with a faircoin address i've created on > my wallet. > > https://wiki.parabola.nu/Donations > cool! my father created a specific gnu character for it and coadde is painting :) > faircoop is donation 1,000 FAIR to non-profit projects, we just have to > make an announcement on our site and send it to them via email[0]. do > you think we can copy that page on parabolaweb as an announcement? > yes, i think so > what other cryptocoins can we use? BTC is the most used but lately i've > seen many issues with it, should we use it? > BTC should be used, it's the most used cryptocoin for donations. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Sat Apr 11 01:55:09 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 22:55:09 -0300 Subject: [Dev] donations page on the wiki + faircoin + cryptocoins In-Reply-To: <5527430A.5030106@riseup.net> References: <877ftl6rf2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <5527430A.5030106@riseup.net> Message-ID: <87twwn1laa.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Andr? Silva writes: >> faircoop is donation 1,000 FAIR to non-profit projects, we just have to >> make an announcement on our site and send it to them via email[0]. do >> you think we can copy that page on parabolaweb as an announcement? >> > yes, i think so could you do i? i don't have my parabolaweb credentials anymore -- P) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Sat Apr 11 02:00:47 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 23:00:47 -0300 Subject: [Dev] donations page on the wiki + faircoin + cryptocoins In-Reply-To: <877ftl6rf2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <877ftl6rf2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <87r3rr1l0w.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Nicol?s Reynolds writes: > i just put up the donations page with a faircoin address i've created on > my wallet. > > https://wiki.parabola.nu/Donations btw the page is protected from user editing. i've also created a Template:FairCoinAddress so if it's used anywhere else it can be called as {{FairCoinAddress}} and if it changes it gets changed anywhere in the wiki. the template is protected too. -- P) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Sat Apr 11 14:25:49 2015 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Andr=E9_Silva?=) Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2015 11:25:49 -0300 Subject: [Dev] donations page on the wiki + faircoin + cryptocoins In-Reply-To: <87twwn1laa.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <877ftl6rf2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <5527430A.5030106@riseup.net> <87twwn1laa.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <55292EED.7010108@riseup.net> On 04/10/2015 10:55 PM, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: > Andr? Silva writes: > >>> faircoop is donation 1,000 FAIR to non-profit projects, we just have to >>> make an announcement on our site and send it to them via email[0]. do >>> you think we can copy that page on parabolaweb as an announcement? >>> >> yes, i think so > > could you do i? i don't have my parabolaweb credentials anymore > yes, i can do it -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From nobody at repo.parabola.nu Mon Apr 13 13:41:52 2015 From: nobody at repo.parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 13:41:52 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [linux-libre] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20150413134152.2231.77391@parabola.nu> jdoe at example.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * linux-libre 3.19.3_gnu-3 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre/ * linux-libre 3.19.3_gnu-3 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre/ * linux-libre-docs 3.19.3_gnu-3 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-docs/ * linux-libre-docs 3.19.3_gnu-3 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-docs/ * linux-libre-headers 3.19.3_gnu-3 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-headers/ * linux-libre-headers 3.19.3_gnu-3 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-headers/ The user provided the following additional text: http://linux-libre.fsfla.org/pub/linux-libre/releases/4.0-gnu/ From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Mon Apr 13 21:07:20 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 18:07:20 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata Message-ID: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> tiberiu just sent me this. i've read it and seems ok to me, what do you think? can we reply by next monday? (the 20th) -- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FSA Ceata-Parabola.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 58854 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- P) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From icarious at hacari.org Mon Apr 13 23:50:45 2015 From: icarious at hacari.org (Icarious) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 05:20:45 +0530 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <20150414052045.6965fecdd18fd32d592dfee5@hacari.org> > tiberiu just sent me this. i've read it and seems ok to me, what do you > think? can we reply by next monday? (the 20th) I reviewed the agreement. Looks ok to me too. -- Icarious GPG Public Key : 0x4428BA28AA2ACCD2 GPG Fingerprint : 6C37 E88E DD0B F042 7A15 676E 4428 BA28 AA2A CCD2 www.gnuos.in -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mtjm at mtjm.eu Tue Apr 14 06:31:19 2015 From: mtjm at mtjm.eu (=?utf-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Mas=C5=82owski?=) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 08:31:19 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Nicol=C3=A1?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= Reynolds"'s message of "Mon, 13 Apr 2015 18:07:20 -0300") References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <87vbgzdxvs.fsf@mtjm.eu> > tiberiu just sent me this. i've read it and seems ok to me, what do you > think? can we reply by next monday? (the 20th) +1 with the following two comments: - 2(b) requires an exception for nonmodifiable license texts - do we have to remove the FDL-licensed manuals with invariant sections (or get them relicensed)? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 818 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tct at ceata.org Tue Apr 14 06:45:12 2015 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 09:45:12 +0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <87vbgzdxvs.fsf@mtjm.eu> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <87vbgzdxvs.fsf@mtjm.eu> Message-ID: <552CB778.50900@ceata.org> Thank you, Micha?; good observations! On 14.04.2015 09:31, Micha? Mas?owski wrote: > - 2(b) requires an exception for nonmodifiable license texts I can add to 2(b) the note that the freedom condition don't apply to license texts. > - do we have to remove the FDL-licensed manuals with invariant sections > (or get them relicensed)? While Ceata acknowledges the issue with GNU FDL with invariant sections, we consider it a minor issue to freedom of reusing documentation, so rest assure that no matter if you blacklist them or not or convince the authors to relicense them (the latter is preferable but takes time), Ceata considers you are a free culture distro too. I can add a note about this too, if you consider it necessary. -- Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic Pre?edinte, Funda?ia Ceata +40-761-810-100 Sus?ii libertatea artelor ?i tehnologiilor? ?nscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Tue Apr 14 13:48:22 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 10:48:22 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <87vbgyvn15.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Nicol?s Reynolds writes: > tiberiu just sent me this. i've read it and seems ok to me, what do you > think? can we reply by next monday? (the 20th) ah and it says i'm the parabola delegate for the first year without provisions if i resign or get revoked. could we rephrase 2(a) from: > a) Nicol?s Reynolds Is Parabola's Delegate (the ?Delegate?) to > communicate any and all donation-related (including but not limited to > expenditure) decisions to Ceata's Council. Ceata will only object to > the decisions to the extent Parabola is not in compliance with ? 2(b) > or ? 5 of this Agreement. to > a) Is the responsibility of Parabola's Delegate (the ?Delegate?) to > communicate any and all donation-related (including but not limited to > expenditure) decisions to Ceata's Council. Ceata will only object to > the decisions to the extent Parabola is not in compliance with ? 2(b) > or ? 5 of this Agreement. Parabola will elect, rotate and revoke the > Delegate on their own and communicate the next Delegate's name to > Ceata's Council. For the present document, the Delegate is Nicol?s > Reynolds. maybe you'd want to add my national id and full name? -- http://utopia.partidopirata.com.ar/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tct at ceata.org Tue Apr 14 14:06:12 2015 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 17:06:12 +0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <87vbgyvn15.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <87vbgyvn15.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <552D1ED4.9010604@ceata.org> On 14.04.2015 16:48, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: > Nicol?s Reynolds writes: > >> tiberiu just sent me this. i've read it and seems ok to me, what do you >> think? can we reply by next monday? (the 20th) > > ah and it says i'm the parabola delegate for the first year without > provisions if i resign or get revoked. could we rephrase 2(a) from: > >> a) Nicol?s Reynolds Is Parabola's Delegate (the ?Delegate?) to >> communicate any and all donation-related (including but not limited to >> expenditure) decisions to Ceata's Council. Ceata will only object to >> the decisions to the extent Parabola is not in compliance with ? 2(b) >> or ? 5 of this Agreement. > > to > >> a) Is the responsibility of Parabola's Delegate (the ?Delegate?) to >> communicate any and all donation-related (including but not limited to >> expenditure) decisions to Ceata's Council. Ceata will only object to >> the decisions to the extent Parabola is not in compliance with ? 2(b) >> or ? 5 of this Agreement. Parabola will elect, rotate and revoke the >> Delegate on their own and communicate the next Delegate's name to >> Ceata's Council. For the present document, the Delegate is Nicol?s >> Reynolds. I would avoid writing down in this agreement anything about the internal organization of Parabola. Legally speaking, Ceata has this agreement with an individual, not with an organization (there is none besides Ceata). If you want to resign or you get replaced, then we add an amendment signed-off by me, you and the delegate in which we specify a different delegate, mentioning which points are affected. I would keep things simple as they are now. Would this be okay with you and Parabola? > maybe you'd want to add my national id and full name? Yes, we should do that in the private final version of the agreement. I will write down mine as well. Thanks! -- Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic Pre?edinte, Funda?ia Ceata +40-761-810-100 Sus?ii libertatea artelor ?i tehnologiilor? ?nscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Tue Apr 14 14:14:29 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 11:14:29 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552D1ED4.9010604@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <87vbgyvn15.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D1ED4.9010604@ceata.org> Message-ID: <87mw2avltm.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic writes: > > I would avoid writing down in this agreement anything about the internal > organization of Parabola. Legally speaking, Ceata has this agreement > with an individual, not with an organization (there is none besides > Ceata). If you want to resign or you get replaced, then we add an > amendment signed-off by me, you and the delegate in which we specify a > different delegate, mentioning which points are affected. I would keep > things simple as they are now. > > Would this be okay with you and Parabola? i'm ok with this >> maybe you'd want to add my national id and full name? > > Yes, we should do that in the private final version of the agreement. I > will write down mine as well. ok -- http://partidopirata.com.ar -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From hellekin at gnu.org Tue Apr 14 15:08:29 2015 From: hellekin at gnu.org (hellekin) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 12:08:29 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 04/13/2015 06:07 PM, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: > > tiberiu just sent me this. i've read it and seems ok to me, what do y ou > think? can we reply by next monday? (the 20th) > *** The document looks good except for the Termination clause (7). This leaves all assets of Parabola in the hands of Ceata if anything goes wrong between the parties. I understand the legality of it, but there's an unnecessary incentive to break a successful cooperation. I think the last point should be changed to benefit another "Successor" such as the FSF or the Free Software Conservancy, etc. 60 days is a very short notice to find a replacement. == hk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJVLS1hXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRFQ0IyNkIyRTNDNzEyMTc2OUEzNEM4ODU0 ODA2QzM2M0ZDMTg5ODNEAAoJEEgGw2P8GJg9TZsP/2lJzYCwjdWR93l+Ci3km6Jk I1YJa4sL9yjOAnCEZ0QB3NeNFX0ZuUlJNYYZgx4R7daEgpc5C2oX0fOw9EyZT3rB XJo80yO0/ad7d+69fnfrgajLkKmqiAePOE/MShG66+txZEUaYnOufDYChsrW2V+r pZMoZ1yYRx/Css7+jjz8eSGw2b5Zo+k1DSWp78WeQ6vhi+J7t9MoPQuDU2eum/SX 5JkkNnEuCh0IjbZtItQ13sjDyYb6DhJLq+mgLQY8OAEmxvj7EvgziJRDadCjmlR5 N3TbO1CiHKyAbq0RJPRt/eh1kgfshEH8Yx0FIBuPj6la0AKUjZ0drwOzvdd16Hvj IW+bM8jVM49mKwW+DqqIAQIfuyPWh3tDeoCI0X9XZB6TtjKc/J9uhPwxKerRDnJt H+KxvjRVL6Ppbb+Kw//59Q6ZaC2JqB6wqoloOfln8n7fG5+5Uspcj5FPFufJnfFV G1amyuORnItdkn2A8s1ozEEVgRY7lbo53607jHzsEbUrbegllqMiRfBw8kMdjEnQ y9uvzmTwDKyDWE3hVV/tjilp86onQbvwA+Qb+ZQ/SQSd/o2xWF+KKIUc1VpS72V4 WaxcmOGXp54sVSkSHLPZFRuLiy+Q1tUpPlLivmW5uhD5+9DquJUJ+H5kSsailUU+ C9tfHNhLj5KahO/LdRVO =UHbQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tct at ceata.org Tue Apr 14 17:07:05 2015 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 20:07:05 +0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> Message-ID: <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> On 14.04.2015 18:08, hellekin wrote: > *** The document looks good except for the Termination clause (7). This > leaves all assets of Parabola in the hands of Ceata if anything goes > wrong between the parties. I understand the legality of it, but there's > an unnecessary incentive to break a successful cooperation. I think the > last point should be changed to benefit another "Successor" such as the > FSF or the Free Software Conservancy, etc. 60 days is a very short > notice to find a replacement. I didn't put too much thought in it knowing the good intentions we have at Ceata, but I admit it made me raise my eyebrow as this is another dangerous clause in the agreement Conservancy uses. https://sfconservancy.org/members/apply/ConservancyFSATemplate.pdf Now I was going to agree with you, we can state that if the Successor is not found in the 60 days, we transfer all funds to the Free Software Foundation, but this would introduce two major problems: First, transferring funds over the Atlantic (from an EU country to the US) is expensive, think at least $100, and this only to make sure there is a buffer until a Successor is found. It's possible $100 will be the donations received by Parabola in 2 months. Lost. And other money lost on the next transfer, to the final Successor (hopefully, on the same continent ;-). Second, it introduces a new party in our agreement (FSF), as you can't make strings-attached donations to another organization without their written permission. And if we have permission, then it means youhave already found the Successor, FSF. Instead, I propose we change that clause to something that says Ceata keeps Parabola Fund blocked until a Successor is found. I doesn't cost Ceata anything to keep Parabola's money in its bank account, at least not more than it costs to keep its own money in its bank account. So, if you or Ceata has decided our agreement is not extended or is terminated before 1 year, and the 60 days have passed failing to find a Successor, Ceata won't operate any new financial transactions on Parabola's behalf. After you find the Successor and we do the papers, we make the transfer to the Successor's bank account. That's it. You are motivated to not postpone finding the Successor because you can't use your money until you find the Successor, Ceata will not act anymore as a fiscal sponsor (but I don't think it will be the case :-). So, what do you think about this proposal? -- Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic Pre?edinte, Funda?ia Ceata +40-761-810-100 Sus?ii libertatea artelor ?i tehnologiilor? ?nscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From mtjm at mtjm.eu Tue Apr 14 19:25:08 2015 From: mtjm at mtjm.eu (=?utf-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Mas=C5=82owski?=) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 21:25:08 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552CB778.50900@ceata.org> (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic's message of "Tue, 14 Apr 2015 09:45:12 +0300") References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <87vbgzdxvs.fsf@mtjm.eu> <552CB778.50900@ceata.org> Message-ID: <87bniqpl63.fsf@mtjm.eu> > While Ceata acknowledges the issue with GNU FDL with invariant sections, > we consider it a minor issue to freedom of reusing documentation, so > rest assure that no matter if you blacklist them or not or convince the > authors to relicense them (the latter is preferable but takes time), > Ceata considers you are a free culture distro too. Same here. Being a free culture distro is not as (seemingly) clear as free software. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 818 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Tue Apr 14 20:45:39 2015 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Andr=E9_Silva?=) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 17:45:39 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> Message-ID: <552D7C73.2040202@riseup.net> On 04/14/2015 02:07 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: > So, what do you think about this proposal? > i think it's ok because give us time to get a successor without problems. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From hellekin at gnu.org Tue Apr 14 21:54:59 2015 From: hellekin at gnu.org (hellekin) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 18:54:59 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> Message-ID: <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 04/14/2015 02:07 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: > > So, what do you think about this proposal? > *** It's a step in the right direction. I would make it a bit clearer: Ceata would hold the funds for a period suitable for the Parabola community to agree on a successor, which cannot exceed, e.g., 9 months. If this succession does not occur within this reasonable time, then the funds should be transferred to an entity supportive of software freedom, either Ceata or another non-profit organization elected by the Parabola Community. This latter part is to protect the Parabola Community in the improbable case of a conflict arising between the two parties. I don't think it will happen, but I would feel better if the community would make the decision whether to donate to Ceata or another entity (e.g., the FSFE). That removes the incentive of non-cooperation on both sides: if Parabola won't find a successor, they contribute to software freedom. If Ceata doesn't think Parabola is doing a good job, they can't capture the funds either. == hk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJVLYyoXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRFQ0IyNkIyRTNDNzEyMTc2OUEzNEM4ODU0 ODA2QzM2M0ZDMTg5ODNEAAoJEEgGw2P8GJg95uoP/iDAe5/KVCMsGxcQw4x1EsbF L7oAzq7MpkfrvAjNICfmcD38WnkdoTWwEUJJszmwQe9AD9IwlChthzkfdIfNdGXc Yp1kvMVL1BFOLHFOKyOBft4S6cBNz3s6xPl0jTCkYPDFO+9zTzMXlhaoOK4w1OIf wO/XMouNKRk8635DoiSWwA5LDLY1AJjeACObGtS5fDOmv8pSj6hPeVxbuY3nGx6u Du+Z7NfBKH9TW4qqMYa8uTdgfhZ6noFZ0LWyt7ZO6Zh1SXfglguOrOzOzPb0Bp7E pqiNQcvQmNZMMN64N55wstjCM90h4O/DBedTw8Ao7CBOXi75Ro4/WHpuu+n4gy+s jVbTeSIO3g9KyugD840sDxC53IKR74R2brngQg8G4y+0a5Z8pBiygol9tDjwhGN6 6JM2irYp7KGoYKUfEPZ6/UC8Ta2E7eNU58bRuz4isLae4i9IZhmbhEtfNpjacni8 fmrwivqnspjs6tZ5nos3nMhDSFToZ+OMU5Qwa+GcJm20vK0HlamOB6pochhUApuv UdYSs28mxojLLphI32GU8MF1SV6bdkdINpwkACEx8m/dxeqthTDdsElJO3t8fDZV pcDsOncPyQWXFvaUY4jSfCOwVUboo4bqRnTo2+eUqcU5yvGYL2YnnhBAGHSxtjmn iKXBU0ECf/VHL4xWo4Qn =vi7W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tct at ceata.org Wed Apr 15 11:57:52 2015 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 14:57:52 +0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> Message-ID: <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> On 15.04.2015 00:54, hellekin wrote: > *** It's a step in the right direction. I would make it a bit clearer: > Ceata would hold the funds for a period suitable for the Parabola > community to agree on a successor, which cannot exceed, e.g., 9 months. > If this succession does not occur within this reasonable time, then the > funds should be transferred to an entity supportive of software freedom, > either Ceata or another non-profit organization elected by the Parabola > Community. If by "transfer" you mean "no strings-attached donation" (you refer to it as "donation" in the second paragraph), then yes. Ceata is a free software organization, so other free software organization would have no reason to reject a donation on behalf of Parabola (or Ceata to make the donation) if it has no strings attached. Ceata can keep the funds blocked for 9 months and if a Successor is still not communicated by the Delegate, then we donate the funds to the free software organization the Delegate tells us to. > This latter part is to protect the Parabola Community in the improbable > case of a conflict arising between the two parties. I don't think it > will happen, but I would feel better if the community would make the > decision whether to donate to Ceata or another entity (e.g., the FSFE). Please note that if at some point funds are to be transferred to FSF*E*, then it certainly is the last stop for that money, because FSFE can only accept donations and spend money on behalf of other projects, but can't transfer it to another organization (they are an association with special status under German law which puts them under this kind of restrictions). > That removes the incentive of non-cooperation on both sides: if > Parabola won't find a successor, they contribute to software freedom. > If Ceata doesn't think Parabola is doing a good job, they can't capture > the funds either. Agreed. However, I want to be clear and make you aware of the following fact, because I've noticed you use the party "Parabola Community" when talking about this agreement. Parabola is self-governed and it's its responsibility to appoint Delegates who won't abuse power. According to this agreement, Ceata has no way of stopping a Delegate from making an abuse (asking on behalf of Parabola to buy a new monitor for himself, to be delivered at his home, regardless of the fact the Parabola community might not be aware of this and regardless of the fact that Parabola community wouldn't agree with it on some mailing list; if the community decides to revoke him and appoint another Delegate, Ceata still needs the cooperation of the former Delegate, to sign-off the amendment relinquishing him of the responsibility and replacing herself/himself with the new Delegate. If Ceata tries to stop the abuse, then the best it can do is say we want to stop this collaboration and ask for a Successor. The Delegate, having bad intentions, can refuse to communicate a Successor to Ceata, regardless if Parabola has actually found one. 2 months pass, the funds get blocked for another 9 months and then Ceata asks for an organization to donate Parabola funds to. The Delegate doesn't appoint any. If there is no default put in place (Free Software Foundation, but this time it's okay to have a default, it's not a Successor, it's just the recipient of a donation) then the money are "captured" by Ceata, which is not okay. So we can change this to: * 2 months passed without a Successor being nominated by the Delegate and/or the Successor doesn't agree, it's not tax-exempt etc. * 9 months passed with the money blocked at Ceata, no Successor communicated by the Delegate * Ceata donates the money to FSF, Parabola loses some money on the transfer and can kindly ask FSF if they want to become their fiscal sponsor. But you have to understand that the Delegate has the power to spend money as (s)he sees fit, block the succession of a new Delegate, block the succession of a new fiscal sponsor and block Parabola funds. What do you want to do about that? Accept it as it is, put in place some safeguards which gives away some of the governance of your community to Ceata? I don't know, but I want you to be aware of the problems that might appear at your end, with the Delegate. -- Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic Pre?edinte, Funda?ia Ceata +40-761-810-100 Sus?ii libertatea artelor ?i tehnologiilor? ?nscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Wed Apr 15 12:08:45 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 09:08:45 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> Message-ID: <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic writes: > What do you want to do about that? Accept it as it is, put in place > some safeguards which gives away some of the governance of your > community to Ceata? I don't know, but I want you to be aware of the > problems that might appear at your end, with the Delegate. a communication from the delegate can be backed by an url to the discussion of parabola community. ceata doesn't care about the discussion itself but it can corroborate the delegate was backed by the community. or, a delegate going rogue is a matter of parabola's self-governance... -- :> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tct at ceata.org Wed Apr 15 12:19:32 2015 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:19:32 +0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> On 15.04.2015 15:08, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: > a communication from the delegate can be backed by an url to the > discussion of parabola community. ceata doesn't care about the > discussion itself but it can corroborate the delegate was backed by the > community. This has crossed my mind. But this means Ceata has to evaluate if some of the concerns expressed by some members have been addressed and solved, if those members confirm it's okay, if all members agree with the Delegate, Ceata doesn't know which are all the members, which have the right to decide, if they don't say anything it means they agree or it means they don't, etc This means a lot of interpretation is left to Ceata, which actually means Ceata steps in your governance. Not okay for Parabola nor for Ceata and I am not willing to parse discussions and put Ceata's Council to decide if what the Delegate has communicated is backed by the community or not quite... It'd be a nightmare. And Ceata could be held responsible by some of the members who don't agree (before or after) with what the Delegate saw fit to communicate to Ceata. -- Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic Pre?edinte, Funda?ia Ceata +40-761-810-100 Sus?ii libertatea artelor ?i tehnologiilor? ?nscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Wed Apr 15 12:52:03 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 09:52:03 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> Message-ID: <87sic1r1u4.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic writes: > On 15.04.2015 15:08, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: >> a communication from the delegate can be backed by an url to the >> discussion of parabola community. ceata doesn't care about the >> discussion itself but it can corroborate the delegate was backed by the >> community. > > This has crossed my mind. But this means Ceata has to evaluate if some > of the concerns expressed by some members have been addressed and > solved, if those members confirm it's okay, if all members agree with > the Delegate, Ceata doesn't know which are all the members, which have > the right to decide, if they don't say anything it means they agree or > it means they don't, etc what i meant is that ceata doesn't have to interpret the discussion, just know that it was had and the delegate doesn't request things by herself, but i see your point. i guess what's left is to let parabola governance out of the document and have ceata trust the delegate. we can cover rogueness on our side, some things we've discussed already. -- .o?) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From hellekin at gnu.org Wed Apr 15 13:02:23 2015 From: hellekin at gnu.org (hellekin) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 10:02:23 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <87sic1r1u4.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> <87sic1r1u4.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <552E615F.10900@gnu.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 04/15/2015 09:52 AM, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: > > we can cover rogueness on our side, some things we've discussed already. > *** I agree. That's an issue with legalese that we need to take into account defectors. Honestly, I find this pretty sick, and one of the pillars of the power of the defectors over cooperators: you have to dirty your mind into thinking like you're going to betray. Yuck. Let's KISS. I think it's right to have an URL for decisions. They should be like https://parabola.nu/donations/RFF-12 (Request For Funds ;o) == hk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJVLmFQXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRFQ0IyNkIyRTNDNzEyMTc2OUEzNEM4ODU0 ODA2QzM2M0ZDMTg5ODNEAAoJEEgGw2P8GJg9HH0P/R02YarsAukSX/XFctrrWyf7 pkeygVMYuAI1EnK+s6jx5Zn3lK6eG8OkpjnIwGR5p3gcDl5NX2qNl9T40fQvCP0X 7VXNk2hT3Uv5F36zVgrvtQJQhdRuuvQW+1fQjprlOMq9+VBVbQVPaohyM83GM6ru bZXO0+/dhZ9jCtqPWRlrIH8T4eXBPrCtfJLviCvX0p7SvPK+VxFD/zT66zXLC8xf 25/GWao4QKwL1xTIcWRAUI75jj0404kGZ/JDTI843Iknq6bUnah8xlBVVbgFr3eI Vx6uHIv25CsPhs6UqdzssCb9Vbc6ZpZ6K1lTV2GaoXv1SvwM8W7r+6b2+KhbzP4p 5g2yZzQcj8fmbE7yrV7YPyh9JRKs0YFrf6XVGum/nyJRb3ALKp/YjpWaCr5cSnhu h3r1GQFahEjR8ADUuoXXV+COvh7i+MuyTJ6qV4iY0Q5jKbjAyUABFJyyvt+n9E0K muHL/EFJ91R2FLe3wBx3vifrPZlbDl2aheYa4nQbTpV91yfCPf6m2Fs/TX9WM9kS 8+6Hlunom70aoPZ/MkV8YxLAALxtQ89nbao6HYaXgTEece6WdvmCEfEyUYJF/X2R aoXCR9P2ak/QC7qFFpJus2EwikJF200DWy/2WSs9jUuhrdQLRsglfvBoi1t8QuTr aYIoimTTV5Yu1ymISutI =jry7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tct at ceata.org Wed Apr 15 13:07:00 2015 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 16:07:00 +0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> Message-ID: <552E6274.30406@ceata.org> On 15.04.2015 15:19, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: > On 15.04.2015 15:08, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: >> a communication from the delegate can be backed by an url to the >> discussion of parabola community. ceata doesn't care about the >> discussion itself but it can corroborate the delegate was backed by the >> community. > > This has crossed my mind. But this means Ceata has to evaluate if some > of the concerns expressed by some members have been addressed and > solved, if those members confirm it's okay, if all members agree with > the Delegate, Ceata doesn't know which are all the members, which have > the right to decide, if they don't say anything it means they agree or > it means they don't, etc > > This means a lot of interpretation is left to Ceata, which actually > means Ceata steps in your governance. Not okay for Parabola nor for > Ceata and I am not willing to parse discussions and put Ceata's Council > to decide if what the Delegate has communicated is backed by the > community or not quite... It'd be a nightmare. And Ceata could be held > responsible by some of the members who don't agree (before or after) > with what the Delegate saw fit to communicate to Ceata. Oh, I think I got this figured out. The agreement has to parties: Ceata and Nicol?s Reynolds. The Delegate is specified in 2(a) and (s)he signs a different paper, a declaration in which (s)he says: I agree to act as Parabola's Delegate in the terms of Ceata's Fiscal Sponsorship Agreement registered with the number __/20.04.2015. When a new Delegate assumes office, Nicol?s Reynolds and Ceata's president sign an amendment modifying 2(a) to specify the new Delegate. The new Delegate signs a declaration (separate paper) saying (s)he agrees. Nicol?s Reynolds would act as a founder (which he is) and we all trust him. We only have to figure out what happens when he isn't available to appoint a new Delegate (he is lost on an island, he is in a comma, he dies, etc). We can add a clause to be possible for the incumbent Delegate and Ceata to void this agreement and sign a new one between her/him and Ceata; if Nicol?s Reynolds doesn't respond to Ceata for 2 months, the Delegate can step in. My head hurts. :-) Does it make sense to go this way? -- Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic Pre?edinte, Funda?ia Ceata +40-761-810-100 Sus?ii libertatea artelor ?i tehnologiilor? ?nscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From tct at ceata.org Wed Apr 15 13:11:17 2015 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 16:11:17 +0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552E615F.10900@gnu.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> <87sic1r1u4.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E615F.10900@gnu.org> Message-ID: <552E6375.4040609@ceata.org> On 15.04.2015 16:02, hellekin wrote: > On 04/15/2015 09:52 AM, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: > >> we can cover rogueness on our side, some things we've discussed already. > > *** I agree. That's an issue with legalese that we need to take into > account defectors. Honestly, I find this pretty sick, and one of the > pillars of the power of the defectors over cooperators: you have to > dirty your mind into thinking like you're going to betray. Yuck. > > Let's KISS. I think it's right to have an URL for decisions. They > should be like https://parabola.nu/donations/RFF-12 (Request For Funds ;o) We can specify that the decision is made available at URL under https://parabola.nu/donations/ and if the URL changes (you lose parabola.nu, you reorganize directories etc), Nicol?s Reynolds and Ceata can sign an amendment specifying a different URL. -- Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic Pre?edinte, Funda?ia Ceata +40-761-810-100 Sus?ii libertatea artelor ?i tehnologiilor? ?nscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri From emulatorman at riseup.net Wed Apr 15 14:03:44 2015 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Andr=E9_Silva?=) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 11:03:44 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552E6274.30406@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> <552E6274.30406@ceata.org> Message-ID: <552E6FC0.1050908@riseup.net> On 04/15/2015 10:07 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: > Nicol?s Reynolds would act as a founder (which he is) and we all trust > him. We only have to figure out what happens when he isn't available to > appoint a new Delegate (he is lost on an island, he is in a comma, he > dies, etc). We can add a clause to be possible for the incumbent > Delegate and Ceata to void this agreement and sign a new one between > her/him and Ceata; if Nicol?s Reynolds doesn't respond to Ceata for 2 > months, the Delegate can step in. My head hurts. :-) > > Does it make sense to go this way? > In my opinion, i think we could have a "vice delegate" for specific cases if the main one isn't available, also she/he could be the next successor and that period could learn about all related to the main delegate functionality. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Wed Apr 15 15:22:57 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 12:22:57 -0300 Subject: [Dev] Fwd: [GNU-linux-libre] Announcement: ConnochaetOS 14.1 beta 3 Message-ID: <877ftdquum.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> -- }(:= -------------------- Start of forwarded message -------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 17:19:43 +0200 From: Henry Jensen To: gnu-linux-libre at nongnu.org Subject: [GNU-linux-libre] Announcement: ConnochaetOS 14.1 beta 3 As of Easter 2015 ConnochaetOS has resurrected. After a nearly 3 year death period I decided to bring ConnochaetOS back to life. ConnochaetOS is a free/libre GNU/Linux distribution for x86 computers with limited ressources. This means it contains only free software and follows the spirit of the GNU Free System Distribution Guidelines and the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Technically ConnochaetOS follows the KISS principle (which means no systemd, for example). It is build on top of the GNU/Linux distributions Slackware and Salix OS. ConnochaetOS 14.1 Beta 3 is available at http://www.connochaetos.org -------------------- End of forwarded message -------------------- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From icarious at hacari.org Wed Apr 15 16:31:56 2015 From: icarious at hacari.org (Icarious) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 22:01:56 +0530 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552E6FC0.1050908@riseup.net> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> <552E6274.30406@ceata.org> <552E6FC0.1050908@riseup.net> Message-ID: <20150415220156.dd6de2bb4d74b6cdb599eb4c@hacari.org> > In my opinion, i think we could have a "vice delegate" for specific > cases if the main one isn't available, also she/he could be the next > successor and that period could learn about all related to the main > delegate functionality. +1. That sounds good. Specially the "learning the role" part in order to preserve consistency. -- Icarious GPG Public Key : 0x4428BA28AA2ACCD2 GPG Fingerprint : 6C37 E88E DD0B F042 7A15 676E 4428 BA28 AA2A CCD2 www.gnuos.in -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From hellekin at gnu.org Wed Apr 15 17:33:14 2015 From: hellekin at gnu.org (hellekin) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 14:33:14 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552E6274.30406@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> <552E6274.30406@ceata.org> Message-ID: <552EA0DA.8070300@gnu.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 04/15/2015 10:07 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: > > her/him and Ceata; if Nicol?s Reynolds doesn't respond to Ceata for 2 > months, the Delegate can step in. My head hurts. :-) > > Does it make sense to go this way? > *** I think it does. == hk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJVLqDUXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRFQ0IyNkIyRTNDNzEyMTc2OUEzNEM4ODU0 ODA2QzM2M0ZDMTg5ODNEAAoJEEgGw2P8GJg93vgP/ikLM79NW5Tn4clDKkai2FQp VSpORdYsIUgYnkmOdaEML5/bqacBi6spsrq5rdcZB7xD2R/O5ReYCiQEGyTXVGMR sHKjDq5wd/wNF+E9L3ihu54/7ADUK0J7mbv+6HE/z8TqC+vz2PiJqXJzvidESVh3 KKxyhE4zr/ozToknYRdE0Z2/Xyi/vMNq7t3N885xzeaqbhrPC1xB+2Om2CB6iaDS iBrJog7eBwIDliydOsuale+hbJs4PfAP3WHh8pqZmmvKgPukqidML0DIU9B1GXqe Rz/jDA/cA5yzc2gi3I7ZdSgbsPBd3tLXFWbIyAC90xMivwgxB88+BXmsz+kgHmro h38R979erMs0x2TSr33Lpj2+4kHvPCsP1CRnBTKnJ67FPHa9/M5Z9c/YtpWZ53cd k/uxM8lCCsvP6vrwUT9aUt3reVHsYTWhRpASbY0XmVaky0tJPjtR88hJ9nqjyxjJ hruXwvwrmwFMDJKKdCaMMWbNluT6yZckqbZIUeLMOVx05AY0b3fCLBd8U+ghlcQt SDd3bGFG41OO3XW0iQGPBW9K1jj4razgDp2tm5/cVR0KmlQnLYKcSpf1yelFKlGl FeY90OV71sSW+FgLThBsE9oAfEw3xu7FiGPZxcvZYyqg3zO51u31xEw392/KNlLg W/+59EZOBj53RD13Iqt7 =+Nag -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From hellekin at gnu.org Wed Apr 15 17:34:59 2015 From: hellekin at gnu.org (hellekin) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 14:34:59 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <20150415220156.dd6de2bb4d74b6cdb599eb4c@hacari.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> <552E6274.30406@ceata.org> <552E6FC0.1050908@riseup.net> <20150415220156.dd6de2bb4d74b6cdb599eb4c@hacari.org> Message-ID: <552EA143.4020107@gnu.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 04/15/2015 01:31 PM, Icarious wrote: >> In my opinion, i think we could have a "vice delegate" for specific >> cases if the main one isn't available, also she/he could be the next >> successor and that period could learn about all related to the main >> delegate functionality. > > +1. That sounds good. Specially the "learning the role" part > *** Agreed. However, like backups, you would need two in different places. More seriously, I think we should keep the contract between Ceata and *one* delegate. How the community handles the delegate, vice-delegate, backup vice-delegate, etc. should be a problem of the community, not Ceata. == hk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJVLqE+XxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRFQ0IyNkIyRTNDNzEyMTc2OUEzNEM4ODU0 ODA2QzM2M0ZDMTg5ODNEAAoJEEgGw2P8GJg93iEP/2SBA/Ak5ucsu0oGmPogA+YD SiXBDrd/cOzoF9ktXcWCVUUw9wXJ1yZSRYZjAW99VOz4VblD/8tNSwx6JyIzI9OA UWseyfOG9u/4tRHvH6Sr6NVPN7UrL9DMUP3iuw1vf+mvLlHpdlXjjOSTpc8wcMNb 4oR2wsuNvG3DJFhD4dtRnhgARmp6jeoMEYCxoJSzdhARSbPqCJOBxcPWMhuqVKXw 7J8tEtBmGRHCeB9lJb8B70WPg641MfmfQXiqFLqwl+sPyXDBQVrhjKWedmuMxR4t /FSmBFs7gIBetsMKjHDQ6QRrryQw9PXemsMefHXaZP+y1SzZV5qJmdZ60QXdb9sr 7/XDBbue0ZAdv1xNLnkpoEqYvoDeGJwS9ZsWz4+9AveCw94QRK9uOTQS1O//hpPU aoCEWyQrweoJOPl+TgZes6QyY59bAzFu+sDhDqC70UV1VMFpv7VIXRFOZNum19NS v2hEubTAN9GrG7iGDtQYCROvt1nLFwIk+emswEq/VDffMtFdsqD3eoS9Dz707UA7 /xNLvA9FD94uPrEU7TgPD6NY3M12BsVBV6X/0evmGlUSefQhVJ8r+iu9ZnO6yt8c ek3y0FoW1I3vSCHhOXOUJTlxpcUh05F6lK/dnqXpjaKOUZkn86K7THLycET+BU+Q /06YcrsUS763C4T7H3t6 =dBR3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From emulatorman at riseup.net Wed Apr 15 18:03:27 2015 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Andr=E9_Silva?=) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:03:27 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <552EA143.4020107@gnu.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552D2D6D.50509@gnu.org> <552D4939.5080308@ceata.org> <552D8CB3.3070605@gnu.org> <552E5240.6040902@ceata.org> <874mohsieq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <552E5754.2010906@ceata.org> <552E6274.30406@ceata.org> <552E6FC0.1050908@riseup.net> <20150415220156.dd6de2bb4d74b6cdb599eb4c@hacari.org> <552EA143.4020107@gnu.org> Message-ID: <552EA7EF.2040401@riseup.net> On 04/15/2015 02:34 PM, hellekin wrote: > On 04/15/2015 01:31 PM, Icarious wrote: >>> In my opinion, i think we could have a "vice delegate" for specific >>> cases if the main one isn't available, also she/he could be the next >>> successor and that period could learn about all related to the main >>> delegate functionality. > >> +1. That sounds good. Specially the "learning the role" part > > *** Agreed. However, like backups, you would need two in different > places. More seriously, I think we should keep the contract between > Ceata and *one* delegate. How the community handles the delegate, > vice-delegate, backup vice-delegate, etc. should be a problem of the > community, not Ceata. > I agree about it too, the vice-delegate (or another similar name) should be a non-official role inside Parabola, so we are keeping the contract between Ceata and Parabola delegate only, but we could have this one as "supply delegate" for emergency cases (if the delegate is silly, in comma, etc.) and for "learning the role" to be the next delegate successor. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 17 06:35:00 2015 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 02:35:00 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <87sibz9sa3.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> > The project known as Parabola GNU/Linux-libre ("Parabola") We've never been super-precise about the nomenclature, but: The project is just "Parabola"; it is the operating system made by the Parabola project that is is "Parabola GNU/Linux-libre". ---- You guys have already addressed my concern about GFDL invariant sections. I would appreciate a note being made about it in the text. You guys have also discussed my concern about termination without a successor. ---- I'm unsure what violation of ?2(b) implies; I'm thinking about temporary accidental non-compliance--the time between a freedom-bug being introduced and it being fixed. Is that grounds for termination? Would it mean that Ceata has the option of saying "no funds until bug XYZ is fixed?" I think I'd like a bit that is analogous to the "Commitment to Correct Mistakes" section of the FSDG. ---- Several ammendments have been discussed--can I assume that we will have a change to review the complete revised document before it is signed? -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From tct at ceata.org Fri Apr 17 06:47:48 2015 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 09:47:48 +0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <87sibz9sa3.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <87sibz9sa3.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <5530AC94.5050302@ceata.org> On 17.04.2015 09:35, Luke Shumaker wrote: > Several ammendments have been discussed--can I assume that we will > have a change to review the complete revised document before it is > signed? Of course, I am working on it and send it to you as soon as possible. -- Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic Pre?edinte, Funda?ia Ceata +40-761-810-100 Sus?ii libertatea artelor ?i tehnologiilor? ?nscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Sat Apr 18 20:05:57 2015 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 16:05:57 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [Maintenance] Cron cd /srv/http/www.parabola.nu/web && ./manage.py mirrorresolv && ./manage.py mirrorcheck -l 1 In-Reply-To: <20150418194709.BAF8BC018B@repo.parabola.nu> References: <20150418194709.BAF8BC018B@repo.parabola.nu> Message-ID: <878udp9p7e.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 15:47:08 -0400, (Cron Daemon) wrote: > > sh: /dev/null: Permission denied > sh: /dev/null: Permission denied > sh: /dev/null: Permission denied This is the same error that made me reboot the server last night. I've also seen it on my desktop (once) and the lukeshu.com server (once). What happens is /dev/null becomes a regular file (not a character device) that has mode 0600, owned by root. This time, I just ran sudo rm /dev/null && sudo mknod -m 0666 /dev/null c 1 3 to fix it. I don't believe there are any other affected files in /dev/. We really should try to figure out what causes this. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From jon at whiteheat.org.uk Sat Apr 18 22:57:15 2015 From: jon at whiteheat.org.uk (jon at whiteheat.org.uk) Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 23:57:15 +0100 Subject: [Dev] [nevermind] Parabola server is down In-Reply-To: <87egni9qlp.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> References: <87k2xa9wt3.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87egni9qlp.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: On 2015-04-18 02:23, Luke Shumaker wrote: > On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:09:28 -0400, > Luke Shumaker wrote: >> I just rebooted the Parabola server (shortly after an upgrade), now >> it's not coming back up. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated! > > Nevermind, it came back up after a couple minutes, then it took another > minute for sshd to start. > > -- > Happy hacking, > ~ Luke Shumaker Okay. I have an uptime of 32 days, and otherwise to do monitor this box. I do know, I run many other things on it, and all of these are performing well. Thanks, Jon From mtjm at mtjm.eu Sun Apr 19 10:46:07 2015 From: mtjm at mtjm.eu (=?utf-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Mas=C5=82owski?=) Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 12:46:07 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [Maintenance] [Django] ERROR (internal IP): Internal Server Error: /packages/extra/mips64el/kdeplasma-addons-applets-bookmarks/files/ In-Reply-To: <20150419103617.838.60656@parabola.nu> (root@localhost.parabola.nu's message of "Sun, 19 Apr 2015 10:36:17 -0000") References: <20150419103617.838.60656@parabola.nu> Message-ID: <87a8y4s8eo.fsf@mtjm.eu> We get many errors like these: > Internal Server Error: /packages/extra/mips64el/kdeplasma-addons-applets-bookmarks/files/ [...] > File "/srv/http/www.parabola.nu/web/templates/packages/files_list.html.jinja", line 1, in top-level template code > {% if pkg.last_update > pkg.files_last_update %} > TypeError: can't compare datetime.datetime to NoneType mips64el doesn't have info on many packages in its *.files databases. Can these be easily regenerated from existing packages, or should we just remove mips64el from parabolaweb? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 818 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Mon Apr 20 17:06:21 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 14:06:21 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [Maintenance] [Django] ERROR (internal IP): Internal Server Error: /packages/extra/mips64el/kdeplasma-addons-applets-bookmarks/files/ In-Reply-To: <87a8y4s8eo.fsf@mtjm.eu> References: <20150419103617.838.60656@parabola.nu> <87a8y4s8eo.fsf@mtjm.eu> Message-ID: <87fv7uivaq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Micha? Mas?owski writes: > We get many errors like these: > >> Internal Server Error: /packages/extra/mips64el/kdeplasma-addons-applets-bookmarks/files/ > [...] >> File "/srv/http/www.parabola.nu/web/templates/packages/files_list.html.jinja", line 1, in top-level template code >> {% if pkg.last_update > pkg.files_last_update %} >> TypeError: can't compare datetime.datetime to NoneType > > mips64el doesn't have info on many packages in its *.files databases. > Can these be easily regenerated from existing packages, or should we > just remove mips64el from parabolaweb? +1 i think we should remove mips64el from parabolaweb with a goodbye post, such as: # Goodbye, mips64el port Since the mips64el port development has stalled for different reasons, we've starting to remove support from our infrastructure. While mips64el info won't be available through the [packages web](/packages) and binary packages removed from repositories, you'll still find documentation about porting on our wiki, the [base root](https://repo.parabola.nu/mips64el/) needed to re-bootstrap the port is available for download, and also the [abslibre-mips64el](https://projects.parabola.nu/abslibre/abslibre-mips64el.git/) tree. We hope someone will find the time and resources to continue the mips64el port, and that the [work we've done](https://projects.parabola.nu/packages/libretools.git/tree/src/dagpkg) serves as base to many other ports of Parabola :) -- D -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Mon Apr 20 17:11:53 2015 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?B?QW5kcsOpIFNpbHZh?=) Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 14:11:53 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [Maintenance] [Django] ERROR (internal IP): Internal Server Error: /packages/extra/mips64el/kdeplasma-addons-applets-bookmarks/files/ In-Reply-To: <87fv7uivaq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <20150419103617.838.60656@parabola.nu> <87a8y4s8eo.fsf@mtjm.eu> <87fv7uivaq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <55353359.2050508@riseup.net> On 04/20/2015 02:06 PM, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: > Micha? Mas?owski writes: > >> We get many errors like these: >> >>> Internal Server Error: /packages/extra/mips64el/kdeplasma-addons-applets-bookmarks/files/ >> [...] >>> File "/srv/http/www.parabola.nu/web/templates/packages/files_list.html.jinja", line 1, in top-level template code >>> {% if pkg.last_update > pkg.files_last_update %} >>> TypeError: can't compare datetime.datetime to NoneType >> >> mips64el doesn't have info on many packages in its *.files databases. >> Can these be easily regenerated from existing packages, or should we >> just remove mips64el from parabolaweb? > > +1 i think we should remove mips64el from parabolaweb with a goodbye > post, such as: > > > # Goodbye, mips64el port > > Since the mips64el port development has stalled for different reasons, > we've starting to remove support from our infrastructure. > > While mips64el info won't be available through the [packages > web](/packages) and binary packages removed from repositories, you'll > still find documentation about porting on our wiki, the [base > root](https://repo.parabola.nu/mips64el/) needed to re-bootstrap the > port is available for download, and also the > [abslibre-mips64el](https://projects.parabola.nu/abslibre/abslibre-mips64el.git/) > tree. > > We hope someone will find the time and resources to continue the > mips64el port, and that the [work we've > done](https://projects.parabola.nu/packages/libretools.git/tree/src/dagpkg) > serves as base to many other ports of Parabola :) > +1 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From mtjm at mtjm.eu Mon Apr 20 17:29:06 2015 From: mtjm at mtjm.eu (=?utf-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Mas=C5=82owski?=) Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 19:29:06 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [Maintenance] [Django] ERROR (internal IP): Internal Server Error: /packages/extra/mips64el/kdeplasma-addons-applets-bookmarks/files/ In-Reply-To: <87fv7uivaq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Nicol=C3=A1?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= Reynolds"'s message of "Mon, 20 Apr 2015 14:06:21 -0300") References: <20150419103617.838.60656@parabola.nu> <87a8y4s8eo.fsf@mtjm.eu> <87fv7uivaq.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <87d22ylndp.fsf@mtjm.eu> > +1 i think we should remove mips64el from parabolaweb with a goodbye > post, such as: I have removed it, now the page returns 404 and doesn't send an error mail. (Other mips64el services that I removed much earlier: running the cron jobs breaking it by updating arch=any packages, and links to the base tarball on "Get Parabola".) > # Goodbye, mips64el port > > Since the mips64el port development has stalled for different reasons, > we've starting to remove support from our infrastructure. > > While mips64el info won't be available through the [packages > web](/packages) and binary packages removed from repositories, you'll > still find documentation about porting on our wiki, the [base > root](https://repo.parabola.nu/mips64el/) needed to re-bootstrap the > port is available for download, and also the > [abslibre-mips64el](https://projects.parabola.nu/abslibre/abslibre-mips64el.git/) > tree. I recommend adding a wiki page with all important links to commits removing mips64el and archived resources: it's more dynamic than a news page, we might remove more in the future. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 818 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nobody at parabola.nu Mon Apr 20 21:05:33 2015 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 21:05:33 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [linux-libre] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20150420210533.340.77933@parabola.nu> remoheld at gmail.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * linux-libre 3.19.4_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre/ * linux-libre 3.19.4_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre/ * linux-libre-docs 3.19.4_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-docs/ * linux-libre-docs 3.19.4_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-docs/ * linux-libre-headers 3.19.4_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-headers/ * linux-libre-headers 3.19.4_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-headers/ The user provided the following additional text: kernel 4.0 released From nobody at parabola.nu Wed Apr 22 20:22:21 2015 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 20:22:21 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Nonprism package [icedove] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20150422202221.338.27827@parabola.nu> parabolahelp at gmail.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * icedove 1:31.6.0.deb1-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/icedove/ * icedove 1:31.6.0.deb1-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/icedove/ The user provided the following additional text: libvpx 1.4.0 rebuild From emulatorman at riseup.net Mon Apr 27 08:14:02 2015 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?B?QW5kcsOpIFNpbHZh?=) Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 05:14:02 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <5530AC94.5050302@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <87sibz9sa3.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <5530AC94.5050302@ceata.org> Message-ID: <553DEFCA.70809@riseup.net> On 04/17/2015 03:47 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: > On 17.04.2015 09:35, Luke Shumaker wrote: >> Several ammendments have been discussed--can I assume that we will >> have a change to review the complete revised document before it is >> signed? > > Of course, I am working on it and send it to you as soon as possible. > Since some days ago, my friend (she's attorney) studied about Romanian laws, reviewed the Ceata draft and some hours ago she sent me a new one based on it (attached on this email) with improvements to help us. That one was written in Spanish because is her native language and doesn't knows English. I could translate it, but i'm not a native Spanish-speaker to create a good translation about it. So, i would be very grateful if somebody with good skills on Spanish-English translation could do it :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ceata-parabola_spanish.odt Type: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text Size: 25001 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From tct at ceata.org Mon Apr 27 08:36:53 2015 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:36:53 +0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <553DEFCA.70809@riseup.net> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <87sibz9sa3.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <5530AC94.5050302@ceata.org> <553DEFCA.70809@riseup.net> Message-ID: <553DF525.2030807@ceata.org> On 27.04.2015 11:14, Andr? Silva wrote: > On 04/17/2015 03:47 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: >> On 17.04.2015 09:35, Luke Shumaker wrote: >>> Several ammendments have been discussed--can I assume that we will >>> have a change to review the complete revised document before it is >>> signed? >> >> Of course, I am working on it and send it to you as soon as possible. >> > Since some days ago, my friend (she's attorney) studied about Romanian > laws, reviewed the Ceata draft and some hours ago she sent me a new one > based on it (attached on this email) with improvements to help us. That > one was written in Spanish because is her native language and doesn't > knows English. > I could translate it, but i'm not a native Spanish-speaker to create a > good translation about it. So, i would be very grateful if somebody with > good skills on Spanish-English translation could do it :) Thank you for your and your friend effort, Andr?. There is no need for a translation, I can understand Spanish (Romanian and Spanish are related). I will look today into her modifications and integrate those in the 2nd version of the draft that I've been working on. Probably tomorrow I will be able to present you the new draft. -- Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic Pre?edinte, Funda?ia Ceata +40-761-810-100 Sus?ii libertatea artelor ?i tehnologiilor? ?nscrie-te ca membru: http://ceata.org/%C3%AEnscrieri -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Mon Apr 27 13:48:46 2015 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?B?QW5kcsOpIFNpbHZh?=) Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:48:46 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] [due 2015-04-20] draft of agreement with ceata In-Reply-To: <553DF525.2030807@ceata.org> References: <87pp77wxdj.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <87sibz9sa3.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <5530AC94.5050302@ceata.org> <553DEFCA.70809@riseup.net> <553DF525.2030807@ceata.org> Message-ID: <553E3E3E.4070900@riseup.net> On 04/27/2015 05:36 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: > On 27.04.2015 11:14, Andr? Silva wrote: >> On 04/17/2015 03:47 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote: >>> On 17.04.2015 09:35, Luke Shumaker wrote: >>>> Several ammendments have been discussed--can I assume that we will >>>> have a change to review the complete revised document before it is >>>> signed? >>> >>> Of course, I am working on it and send it to you as soon as possible. >>> >> Since some days ago, my friend (she's attorney) studied about Romanian >> laws, reviewed the Ceata draft and some hours ago she sent me a new one >> based on it (attached on this email) with improvements to help us. That >> one was written in Spanish because is her native language and doesn't >> knows English. >> I could translate it, but i'm not a native Spanish-speaker to create a >> good translation about it. So, i would be very grateful if somebody with >> good skills on Spanish-English translation could do it :) > > Thank you for your and your friend effort, Andr?. There is no need for a > translation, I can understand Spanish (Romanian and Spanish are > related). I will look today into her modifications and integrate those > in the 2nd version of the draft that I've been working on. Probably > tomorrow I will be able to present you the new draft. > You're welcome Tiberiu! Let us know when it's ready because i'm looking forward to reading the new draft :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Thu Apr 30 21:09:23 2015 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (=?utf-8?Q?Nicol=C3=A1s?= Reynolds) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 18:09:23 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] bitcoin? Message-ID: <87mw1pz5ks.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> i was creating a btc address with electrum and i see we can have a multisig wallet, meaning 2 out of 2 or 2 out of 3 hackers could decide to make a transaction. i guess it's more secure this way as well as bureaucratic, and we'd need to decide who else is going to act as signer. or should i just create a single address like with faircoin? -- .o?) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Thu Apr 30 21:53:48 2015 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Andr=E9_Silva?=) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 18:53:48 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [donations] bitcoin? In-Reply-To: <87mw1pz5ks.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87mw1pz5ks.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <5542A46C.80701@riseup.net> On 04/30/2015 06:09 PM, Nicol?s Reynolds wrote: > > i was creating a btc address with electrum and i see we can have a > multisig wallet, meaning 2 out of 2 or 2 out of 3 hackers could decide > to make a transaction. i guess it's more secure this way as well as > bureaucratic, and we'd need to decide who else is going to act as > signer. > > or should i just create a single address like with faircoin? > i think we should create a single address like faircoin to avoid generate differences between us -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: