Re: [aur-general] TU application - rgacogne
On Sun, 2020-12-06 at 00:56 +0100, Morten Linderud via aur-general wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 12:55:21AM +0100, Morten Linderud wrote: > > > Congratulations Remi! Welcome to the Trusted User team :) > Bravo and welcome ️ Cheers, Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [aur-general] TU application - rgacogne
On Fri, 2020-11-13 at 08:52 +0100, Remi Gacogne via aur-general wrote: > ... > Hello, Remi would be a great addition to the team. I can testify he loves beers and he's kind. Regards, Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [aur-general] TU application; freswa
On Thu, 2020-05-28 at 08:42 -0300, Giancarlo Razzolini via aur-general wrote: > Em maio 21, 2020 8:29 Giancarlo Razzolini via aur-general escreveu: > > The discussion period is over. Let's vote! > > > > https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=121 > > > > > > The voting period is over and we have a result: > > Yes: 39 > No: 3 > Abstain: 9 > Participation: 92.73% > > So, I guess it's official, welcome to the team! Yes, welcome aboard ! Cheers, -- Seblu signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [aur-general] Being an asshole to package maintainers is a bannable offense, and that's okay (Was: EQ And Community Kindness)
On Wed, 2020-01-15 at 17:42 -0500, Santiago Torres-Arias via aur-general wrote: > > Eli, I suggest you re-phrase that message. Michael, thanks for bringing > this up. > I cut for readability but I totally agree with what Santiago says. Regards, Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [aur-general] Dropping official gitlab packages
On Thu, 2019-12-26 at 01:51 +0100, Sven-Hendrik Haase via aur-general wrote: > On Thu, 26 Dec 2019 at 01:43, Anatol Pomozov < > Because Docker+EE works flawlessly and reliably while upstream breaks the > packages we have every other release. Upstream _needs_ their Docker EE > image to work as there's tons of money to be lost there but they don't care > about our downstream packages. Also, I didn't see any way to package their > EE at the time. I lost too much time maintaining these fruitless packages > and it's time to cut those losses. Hello, Both Docker images work flawlessly since years (they are officially supported). I guess the question was more about EE vs CE. I recently noticed than well known opensource distro now use the CE. Regards, Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [aur-general] TU application: a-wing
On Tue, 2018-12-25 at 10:05 +0100, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 9:13 AM Chih-Hsuan Yen via aur-general < > aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > > I don't like this. I does not appear as though Metal A-wing put in > anyresearch into this (going to the archives, checking proper > applications).There is nothing there. Even if Metal A-wing now produces a > properapplication mail, I'll be very skeptical. I agree. Sponsoring should include some mentoring, at least how to apply. Cheers, Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [aur-general] On TU application, TU participation and community/ package quality
On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 20:10 +0100, Robin Broda via aur-general wrote: > Plenty TUs appear to agree with most things said here, both on the ml and in > our top-secret irc channel - however, some have raised issues with part of > the suggestions which makes me wonder how we should approach this to reach > consensus. Lot of questions asked, few answered. Like those in my mail. New side proposals was suggestion by several people, I don't know how you can see who is agreeing on what. > I feel like maybe if we split up each point and have a vote for each of them, > we could figure out what exactly the others from the team are looking for - > without blocking some of the proposals here by batching them up with the ones > that weren't so well received. Split will also help to understand the potential benefit of each change and if there is a real problem behind. Regards, Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [aur-general] On TU application, TU participation and community/ package quality
On Sun, 2018-11-11 at 13:29 -0500, Santiago Torres-Arias via aur-general wrote: > ## Issues > * Existing Trusted Users are not followed closely in their actions, and the > quality of some packages for instance is more than questionable. Do you have several example to show? > * New applications are not carefully reviewed, and a several TUs seem > to just vote “Yes” by default. From which facts are this assumption is built from? > * There is a general feeling of decreasing/not high enough quality in the > packages provided in the community/ repository. Idem. What elements do you have to support this feeling ? > * The implication of some TUs in the distribution is very limited outside of > packaging. What's wrong with that? Regards, Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
