[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Bug-sysutils] #sysutils

From: David Weinehall
Subject: Re: [Bug-sysutils] #sysutils
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 21:58:46 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/

On Sun, Jun 25, 2006 at 09:41:46PM +0200, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>    I didn't know it was possible to only filter out specific wallops?
> Depends on what you mean with `specific' wallops.  /mode -w (or some
> such) filters out all of 'em.  Dunno if you can say `filter out
> wallops that are about splits'

That's what I want.

>    > technical reasons instead of personal ones?
>    No.  But those wallops are definitely unnecessary noise.
> I think the ones about rehubbing are not needed, and I personally
> would like to see more wallops that are directly concerned with
> actions against DRM, GNU related things, etc.

I'm already aware of the evils of DRM, and I can find GNU related
information other places.  The only information I need is about
network downtime.  Anything else is a nuisance, nothing else.
Especially the fundraiser messages.

>    > Splits are a nautral thing on big big IRC networks.
>    Yes.  And using a smaller IRC network helps alleviate that problem.
> It also helps to `alleviate' getting any users to know about the
> network or helping it out.
>    > Both Savannah and Freenode are the offical places for GNU source
>    > code repositories and IRC time wastage.  Why would do you want to
>    > make GNU Sysutils hard to find and get help with for users?
>    #sysutils is for us developers, not the users, and as such,
>    whatever fits us best is most benificient for the project, wouldn't
>    you agree?
> #sysutils is the project channel, so there is nothing `developer
> specific' about it IMHO. I'd agree if it was #sysutils-devel.

Well, at this point, we have roughly 0 users.  No distribution ships
sysutils yet (a fact which I'm thankful for, since it has not been
properly security audited yet).  If any users would show up and ask
for help - I wouldn't mind answering, but for the benefit of these
potential users a simple /topic #sysutils "Check out this channel on
oftc instead" on freenode would work.

>    I am getting frustrated by some of the bullshit going on lately,
>    however, such as the "FDL documentation only" policy, and the rants
>    about texinfo...
> These are offical GNU policies, and since sysutils is a GNU project it
> must follow them.  As a maintainer (I assume both you and Jeff
> maintain sysutils together) of a GNU project you agreed to follow
> these policies.

No, I did not agree to follow those policies, they have been
introduce post-fact after we set up the sysutils project at

I'm not going to abandon real manual pages in exchange for totally
unusable info pages, and the pages will remain under a usable free
license.  The MIT license is GFDL compatible though, to the best of my
knowledge, so that shouldn't pose a problem.  Any submissions of
documentation to Sysutils that isn't GPL compatible (which the GFDL
isn't) will be dropped.  If anyone feels like submitting info-pages
for Sysutils, that's all fine and dandy, but the manual pages will
remain the authoritive documentation.

If push comes to shove on that issue, I will definitely stop any and all
work on GNU Sysutils and return to developing it on my own.  Considering
that I've written more than 95% of the code and documentation so far,
I don't feel that I demand too much when I ask for license terms and
means of documentation that I can accept myself.

Regards: David
 /) David Weinehall <address@hidden> /) Northern lights wander      (\
//  Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel   //  Dance across the winter sky //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/    (/   Full colour fire           (/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]