1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1V1imY-0008NG-Rc
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:02:02 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.180 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.180; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f180.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1V1imW-0007wq-RD
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:02:02 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f180.google.com with SMTP id eh20so11155400obb.11
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.95.198 with SMTP id dm6mr32690642oeb.44.1374609715460;
Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.23.36 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 22:01:55 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: EM-2zMMEnRJwi8eKLaCg_HBIzp4
Message-ID: <CANEZrP2GvgZP_1z3EoSs3p+db7tZB6JfEVAewLpGE5eRpGgR3w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011606f4cb806004e2334381
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1V1imW-0007wq-RD
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Linux packaging letter
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:02:03 -0000
--089e011606f4cb806004e2334381
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi,
Some of us have put together an open letter to the Linux packaging
community, outlining why Bitcoin is different to other programs and asking
them to not patch or modify the upstream sources.
Please consider signing it if you agree (I think the wording by now is
fine, so don't edit the contents - use the comment feature if you want to
though).
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1naenR6N6fMWSpHM0f4jpQhYBEkCEQDbLBs8AXC19Y-o/edit#heading=h.i7tz3gqh65mi
The trigger for this is the discovery that Debian bitcoind's got split out
of the consensus some time in April, for reasons that nobody yet figured
out but is presumably related to a patch (eg it uses system leveldb).
--089e011606f4cb806004e2334381
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Hi,<div><br></div><div>Some of us have put together an ope=
n letter to the Linux packaging community, outlining why Bitcoin is differe=
nt to other programs and asking them to not patch or modify the upstream so=
urces.=C2=A0</div>
<div><br></div><div>Please consider signing it if you agree (I think the wo=
rding by now is fine, so don't edit the contents - use the comment feat=
ure if you want to though).</div><div><br></div><div><a href=3D"https://doc=
s.google.com/document/d/1naenR6N6fMWSpHM0f4jpQhYBEkCEQDbLBs8AXC19Y-o/edit#h=
eading=3Dh.i7tz3gqh65mi">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1naenR6N6fMWSpH=
M0f4jpQhYBEkCEQDbLBs8AXC19Y-o/edit#heading=3Dh.i7tz3gqh65mi</a><br>
</div><div><br></div><div>The trigger for this is the discovery that Debian=
bitcoind's got split out of the consensus some time in April, for reas=
ons that nobody yet figured out but is presumably related to a patch (eg it=
uses system leveldb).</div>
</div>
--089e011606f4cb806004e2334381--
|
