Apparently there are some people who think the bylaws are broken. On another
readthrough it seems to me that the entire document could be streamlined
substantially, and definitions could be made more explicit (especially in
the matter of activity versus inactivity).
In addition it is my personal o
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Christopher Brannon
wrote:
> Ionuț Bîru writes:
>
>> 2) no commits in community since the addition.
>>
>> 3) he's not marked as inactive and conform bylaws this deviates from
>> the "above", above being, 5 days discussion period + 7 voting. Because
>> of that i'm s
Ionuț Bîru writes:
> 2) no commits in community since the addition.
>
> 3) he's not marked as inactive and conform bylaws this deviates from
> the "above", above being, 5 days discussion period + 7 voting. Because
> of that i'm starting a 3 days discussion period and 5 days voting.
If he had eve
2010/12/4 Laurent Carlier :
> Le samedi 4 décembre 2010 23:58:33, Ionuț Bîru a écrit :
>> hi,
>> because of my lack of understanding of bylaws and failing to comply with
>> them on my first proposal, i like to take the chance and redo the
>> proposal, following letter by letter the removing procedu
2010/12/4 Ray Rashif :
> On 5 December 2010 06:46, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
>> we are all nerds and not layers and we are not in a judge curt to follow,
>> bylaws letter by letter
>
> The bylaws are what empower us to act upon and make decisions - it's
> not about following the laws word by word. Without
PyroPeter wrote:
> On 12/05/2010 12:44 AM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-12-05 at 07:22 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
> >> On 5 December 2010 06:46, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> >>> we are all nerds and not layers and we are not in a judge curt to follow,
> >>> bylaws letter by letter
> >>
> >> The bylaws
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Loui Chang wrote:
> http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html
>
> I've noticed that there have been a few cases relatively recently where
> people don't really understand the bylaws.
>
> I'd like to encourage all Trusted Users to read over the bylaws
> pe
On 12/05/2010 12:44 AM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
On Sun, 2010-12-05 at 07:22 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
On 5 December 2010 06:46, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
we are all nerds and not layers and we are not in a judge curt to follow,
bylaws letter by letter
The bylaws are what empower us to act upon and make deci
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 01:39:13AM +0100, PyroPeter wrote:
> On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >the 5 days discussion period have ended.
> >
> >http://aur.archlinux.org/tu.php?id=42
> >
>
> 42!
>
Yup, that's right. 42. Vote wisely, gentlemen. We may very well unfold
the mean
On 05.12.2010 01:39, PyroPeter wrote:
> On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the 5 days discussion period have ended.
>>
>> http://aur.archlinux.org/tu.php?id=42
>>
>
> 42!
>
1.40500612 × 10^51
On 12/04/2010 07:29 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
http://aur.archlinux.org/tu.php?id=42
42!
--
freenode/pyropeter "12:50 - Ich drücke Return."
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> On 12/05/2010 01:06 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
>>
>> On Sun 05 Dec 2010 00:44 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/05/2010 12:25 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html
I've noticed that there ha
On Sun, 2010-12-05 at 07:22 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
> On 5 December 2010 06:46, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> > we are all nerds and not layers and we are not in a judge curt to follow,
> > bylaws letter by letter
>
> The bylaws are what empower us to act upon and make decisions - it's
> not about followi
On 5 December 2010 06:46, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> we are all nerds and not layers and we are not in a judge curt to follow,
> bylaws letter by letter
The bylaws are what empower us to act upon and make decisions - it's
not about following the laws word by word. Without them, we wouldn't
take ourselve
On 12/05/2010 01:06 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
On Sun 05 Dec 2010 00:44 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 12/05/2010 12:25 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html
I've noticed that there have been a few cases relatively recently where
people don't really understand the b
On Sun 05 Dec 2010 00:44 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> On 12/05/2010 12:25 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
> >http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html
> >
> >I've noticed that there have been a few cases relatively recently where
> >people don't really understand the bylaws.
> >
> >I'd like to encour
Le samedi 4 décembre 2010 23:58:33, Ionuț Bîru a écrit :
> hi,
> because of my lack of understanding of bylaws and failing to comply with
> them on my first proposal, i like to take the chance and redo the
> proposal, following letter by letter the removing procedure.
>
> Conform bylaws a motion p
hi,
because of my lack of understanding of bylaws and failing to comply with
them on my first proposal, i like to take the chance and redo the
proposal, following letter by letter the removing procedure.
Conform bylaws a motion procedure should be sent on aur-general with
reasons.
Here are
On 12/05/2010 12:32 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
On Sun 05 Dec 2010 00:15 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
maybe i lack the understanding of words and to quote from bylaws:
"The removal of a Trusted User may also occur at any time.
A motion must be made by at least two active Trusted Users for the removal
o
On 12/05/2010 12:25 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html
I've noticed that there have been a few cases relatively recently where
people don't really understand the bylaws.
I'd like to encourage all Trusted Users to read over the bylaws
periodically to make s
On Sun 05 Dec 2010 00:15 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
>
> maybe i lack the understanding of words and to quote from bylaws:
>
> "The removal of a Trusted User may also occur at any time.
>
> A motion must be made by at least two active Trusted Users for the removal
> of a Trusted User. (THIS IS ME)
http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html
I've noticed that there have been a few cases relatively recently where
people don't really understand the bylaws.
I'd like to encourage all Trusted Users to read over the bylaws
periodically to make sure that they fully understand the procedure
On Sun 05 Dec 2010 00:15 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> On 12/05/2010 12:07 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
> >On Sat 04 Dec 2010 23:59 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> >>On 12/04/2010 11:53 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:
> >>>On 5 December 2010 05:46, Loui Chang wrote:
> On Sat 04 Dec 2010 22:19 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 12/05/2010 12:07 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
On Sat 04 Dec 2010 23:59 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 12/04/2010 11:53 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:
On 5 December 2010 05:46, Loui Chang wrote:
On Sat 04 Dec 2010 22:19 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 12/03/2010 12:06 AM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
I'm waiting to see
On Sat 04 Dec 2010 23:59 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> On 12/04/2010 11:53 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:
> >On 5 December 2010 05:46, Loui Chang wrote:
> >>On Sat 04 Dec 2010 22:19 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> >>>On 12/03/2010 12:06 AM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
>
> I'm waiting to see your replies and then ac
On 12/04/2010 11:53 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:
On 5 December 2010 05:46, Loui Chang wrote:
On Sat 04 Dec 2010 22:19 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 12/03/2010 12:06 AM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
I'm waiting to see your replies and then act based on them.
i don't see this being discuss any further and all
On 5 December 2010 05:46, Loui Chang wrote:
> On Sat 04 Dec 2010 22:19 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
>> On 12/03/2010 12:06 AM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
>> >
>> >I'm waiting to see your replies and then act based on them.
>> >
>>
>> i don't see this being discuss any further and all messages have been only
>>
On 12/04/2010 11:46 PM, Loui Chang wrote:
On Sat 04 Dec 2010 22:19 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 12/03/2010 12:06 AM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
I'm waiting to see your replies and then act based on them.
i don't see this being discuss any further and all messages have been only
in one direction.
i m
On Sat 04 Dec 2010 22:19 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> On 12/03/2010 12:06 AM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
> >
> >I'm waiting to see your replies and then act based on them.
> >
>
> i don't see this being discuss any further and all messages have been only
> in one direction.
>
> i modified his account on aur
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Stefan Husmann
wrote:
> Am 04.12.2010 16:40, schrieb Joao Cordeiro:
>
> Done, many thanks!
>
Some more:
1) qutim-svn [1.1], qutim-plugin-kde-integration-svn [1.2],
qutim-plugin-icq-svn [1.3], qutim-plugin-jabber-svn [1.4],
qutim-plugin-mrim-svn [1.5] were replace
On 12/03/2010 12:06 AM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:
I'm waiting to see your replies and then act based on them.
i don't see this being discuss any further and all messages have been
only in one direction.
i modified his account on aur to normal user. Ranguvar, i'm sorry for
this and when you'll hav
I sent a delete request awhile ago but I haven't heard a response. In
case it didn't send properly here it is again. These perl packages are
already provided in the [extra] repository and due to naming confusion
were uploaded to the AUR. I adopted these as the aurperl user when
they were orphans. I
Am 04.12.2010 16:40, schrieb Joao Cordeiro:
> Some time ago I noticed that (obviously) there are several *-svn aur
> packages that no longer make sense because they were changed to git
> upstream. After a little thinking I came up with a list of all *-svn and
> *-cvs packages and made a script to c
Hi,
the 5 days discussion period have ended.
http://aur.archlinux.org/tu.php?id=42
--
Ionuț
On 12/04/2010 07:53 PM, solsTiCe d'Hiver wrote:
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23281 seems to be an old
version of geogebra. it is orphaned.
latest package is geogebra (3.2.45.0) or even geogebra-beta.
so this one, geogebra_dl stucked at 3.0.0 could be deleted.
delete. thanks
--
Io
On 12/04/2010 03:52 PM, solsTiCe d'Hiver wrote:
hi.
From what I understand arista is on a git server. so arista-bzr is
outdated. and could be removed.
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25876
There is currently an arista-devel package but it should be better
renamed arista-git.
what's
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23281 seems to be an old
version of geogebra. it is orphaned.
latest package is geogebra (3.2.45.0) or even geogebra-beta.
so this one, geogebra_dl stucked at 3.0.0 could be deleted.
On 12/04/2010 03:16 AM, Simon Stoakley wrote:
The day was 03/12/10 21:24 when , Xyne had this to say..:
On 2010-12-03 20:33 +0100 (48:5)
Stefan Husmann wrote:
Am 03.12.2010 19:46, schrieb keenerd:
Officially, the tarballs uploaded to the AUR should be named after
their package, contain a
Some time ago I noticed that (obviously) there are several *-svn aur
packages that no longer make sense because they were changed to git
upstream. After a little thinking I came up with a list of all *-svn and
*-cvs packages and made a script to check if said packages have a
corresponding -git pack
hi.
>From what I understand arista is on a git server. so arista-bzr is
outdated. and could be removed.
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25876
There is currently an arista-devel package but it should be better
renamed arista-git.
what's the way to go ? arista-devel is acceptable as a nam
On 12/04/2010 01:07 PM, jesse jaara wrote:
Please remove:
openoffice.org-voikko
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29139
A new pkg called voikko-openoffice was created
to that the name would be similar to
voikko-libreoffice
suomi-malaga
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29138
A ne
Please remove:
openoffice.org-voikko
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29139
A new pkg called voikko-openoffice was created
to that the name would be similar to
voikko-libreoffice
suomi-malaga
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29138
A new pkg called suomi-malaga-voikko was
created
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 11:05 AM, jesse jaara wrote:
> Following packages have been out-of-date for a some time now
> suomi-malaga
> libvoikko
> enchant-voikko
> mozvoikko
> openoffice.org-voikko
>
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29725
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=9525
> ht
Following packages have been out-of-date for a some time now
suomi-malaga
libvoikko
enchant-voikko
mozvoikko
openoffice.org-voikko
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29725
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=9525
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30563
http://aur.archlinux.org/pa
44 matches
Mail list logo
