Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread Daniel Micay
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Eric Waller wrote: > I have tried to stay out of this in that I am not a TU and my input carries > no official weight. I am, however, a moderator on the forums and a > professional with significant experience in the field of trust, so I hope > you give me some cre

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread Eric Waller
I have tried to stay out of this in that I am not a TU and my input carries no official weight. I am, however, a moderator on the forums and a professional with significant experience in the field of trust, so I hope you give me some creed. I find your argument to have no basis in fact and to be

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread Daniel Micay
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: > The current (majority) voting system is fine -- making decisions based > on consensus agreement is not a suitable method for the TU selection > process (it would needlessly raise the bar for something that is not a > matter of public safe

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread Connor Behan
On 24/03/13 12:30 PM, Xyne wrote: > Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > >>> Objections were raised and then countered with arguments. If anyone felt >>> that >>> the objections were still valid after that then they should have replied >>> with >>> their reasons. That is the point of the discussion peri

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread Rashif Ray Rahman
On 25 March 2013 03:30, Xyne wrote: > Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > >>> Objections were raised and then countered with arguments. If anyone felt >>> that >>> the objections were still valid after that then they should have replied >>> with >>> their reasons. That is the point of the discussion p

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread Xyne
Sébastien Luttringer wrote: >> Objections were raised and then countered with arguments. If anyone felt that >> the objections were still valid after that then they should have replied with >> their reasons. That is the point of the discussion period: to discuss the >> issues and reconsider them i

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread Sébastien Luttringer
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Xyne wrote: > Don deJuan wrote: > >>> There were objections! You consider them not sufficient to leads to this >>> result. >>> Everything that needed to be said has been said. After the voters have >>> made up their minds. > > Objections were raised and then count

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread member graysky
I unsubscribed from the ML so I'm not 100 % sure that this message will nest itself under Xyne's reply[1]. I would appear to be a polarizing force based on the votes; I wouldn't be comfortable joining the TU group given the more or less 50/50 split reflected in the data. To my supporters, I'd lik

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread Lukas Jirkovsky
On 24 March 2013 04:42, Xyne wrote: > If a TU has an objection that he cannot support publicly then something is > very > wrong. The application process should not be some mysterious black box of > negative, baseless opinions. If a TU would rather keep an objection to himself > than risk offendin

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread Xyne
Don deJuan wrote: >> There were objections! You consider them not sufficient to leads to this >> result. >> Everything that needed to be said has been said. After the voters have >> made up their minds. Objections were raised and then countered with arguments. If anyone felt that the objections

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-24 Thread David Benfell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/23/2013 10:23 PM, Don deJuan wrote: > > From a non TU's perspective D.R. was the only one who could > publicly state why greysky should not be a TU, and the rest of the > sheeple just followed the "old and grumpy" man, at least that is > "public

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread Don deJuan
On 03/23/2013 09:59 PM, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Xyne wrote: >> Xyne wrote: >> @TUs >> The discussion period for this application was relatively short with very few >> participating TUs. The only real objections were raised by Dave (who even >> admitted that h

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread Sébastien Luttringer
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Xyne wrote: > Xyne wrote: > @TUs > The discussion period for this application was relatively short with very few > participating TUs. The only real objections were raised by Dave (who even > admitted that he may be "old and grumpy") and they were addressed without

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread Xyne
Lukas Jirkovsky wrote: >On 23 March 2013 17:51, Xyne wrote: >> @TUs >> Voting "no" rather than abstaining indicates that you have reasons to reject >> the candidate. These should have been brought up during the discussion >> period. >> If they are valid then other TUs should be made aware of the

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread Stefan Husmann
Am 23.03.2013 18:51, schrieb Xyne: Xyne wrote: The discussion period for graysky's application is over. It's time for the TUs to vote: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=68 The voting period has ended. The finally tally was yes: 12 no: 14 abstain: 4 Quorum has been met. I am sorry to announce

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread Lukas Jirkovsky
On 23 March 2013 17:51, Xyne wrote: > @TUs > Voting "no" rather than abstaining indicates that you have reasons to reject > the candidate. These should have been brought up during the discussion period. > If they are valid then other TUs should be made aware of them and take them > into > account

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread Christos Nouskas
On 23 March 2013 19:51, Xyne wrote: > The voting period has ended. The finally tally was > > yes: 12 > no: 14 > abstain: 4 > > Quorum has been met. I am sorry to announce that the application has been > rejected. I certainly didn't see this coming: I can't believe so many TUs voted "NO" without

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread Ike Devolder
Op zaterdag 23 maart 2013 17:51:42 schreef Xyne: > Xyne wrote: > >The discussion period for graysky's application is over. > >It's time for the TUs to vote: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=68 > > The voting period has ended. The finally tally was > > yes: 12 > no: 14 > abstain: 4 > > Quorum has

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread SanskritFritz
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 7:01 PM, member graysky wrote: > > Thanks for supporting the application, Xyne, and to those who > participated in the subsequent discussion. I was really happy to have > read the kind words from some of the the non-TUs who posted in support > of me as well. Thanks guys!

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread member graysky
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Xyne wrote: > Xyne wrote: > >>The discussion period for graysky's application is over. >>It's time for the TUs to vote: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=68 > > The voting period has ended. The finally tally was > > yes: 12 > no: 14 > abstain: 4 > > Quorum has been

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-23 Thread Xyne
Xyne wrote: >The discussion period for graysky's application is over. >It's time for the TUs to vote: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=68 The voting period has ended. The finally tally was yes: 12 no: 14 abstain: 4 Quorum has been met. I am sorry to announce that the application has been reject

[aur-general] TU application from graysky - voting period

2013-03-16 Thread Xyne
The discussion period for graysky's application is over. It's time for the TUs to vote: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=68

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-14 Thread member graysky
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Felix Yan wrote: > I'd been using linux-ck for more than one year since I installed Arch for the > first time (was using zen-kernel in Ubuntu before, mainly for BFS). I got > rapid replies from graysky on the AUR comments (before I apply for a TU) and > really h

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread Andrea Castaneda
> Dave Reisner wrote: > > I'm replying to the rest of this thread with full disclosure: graysky asked > me to sponsor him first, and I've declined based on a lack of skill and what > I feel isn't necessary the correct attitude for an Arch TU. I don't understand the sudden scrutiny about skill leve

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread Felix Yan
I'd been using linux-ck for more than one year since I installed Arch for the first time (was using zen-kernel in Ubuntu before, mainly for BFS). I got rapid replies from graysky on the AUR comments (before I apply for a TU) and really helpful. Although I'm not using -ck patchset for months due

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread Xyne
Xyne wrote: >Alexander Rødseth wrote: > >>While not handling spaces in directory names is kinda bad > >+1 >*glares at certain makepkg devs* >:P Apparently my meatspace RAM is faulty. s/makepkg devs/devs and TUs/ (there's a lot of unquoted $srcdir and $pkgdir variables in the official repos, and

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread Xyne
Alexander Rødseth wrote: >While not handling spaces in directory names is kinda bad +1 *glares at certain makepkg devs* :P

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread Alexander Rødseth
Hi, I haven't interacted much with graysky, but reported a bug against profile-cleaner that was handled reasonably well: https://github.com/graysky2/profile-cleaner/issues/6 While not handling spaces in directory names is kinda bad, he was "on the ball", followed up and fixed the problem within a

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread Christos Nouskas
On 11 March 2013 22:24, member graysky wrote: > Hi All. Inspired by Allan's talk @ SINFO XX, I decided to throw my > hat into the ring and formally apply to be a TU. As the maintainer of linux-pf AUR package and unofficial repo I happened to interact with graysky a few times in the past and I on

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread member graysky
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: > The username "graysky" sounds familiar to me, but it doesn't register > anything negative. At one glance, though, I can derive at least one > fact -- there have been applicants in the past much less competent. As > such, I do not see comp

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread member graysky
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Xyne wrote: >>2) To claim that you're saving your precious SSD "unnecessary writes" is >>advanced silliness. Recent controllers don't have nearly the same >>problems early SSDs had. > > Phrases such as "advanced silliness" have no place in a serious technical > di

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread Rashif Ray Rahman
On 12 March 2013 04:24, member graysky wrote: > Hi All. Inspired by Allan's talk @ SINFO XX, I decided to throw my > hat into the ring and formally apply to be a TU. My linux history > started with RH and SUSE over a decade ago. I discovered Debian and > Ubuntu. I found myself wanting more con

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread member graysky
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote: > I'm not sure if I should take part in the discussion, as my application > also hasn't specified anything besides packages I want to maintain, but… > > As long as I understand (not only) your need of privacy, I would like to > know a

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread member graysky
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Xyne wrote: > I was not aware of this and I admit that my enthusiasm for the application was > slightly diminished, but I stand by my sponsorship. > > > But yeah, it would have been nice to get a full disclosure directly. > I didn't realize it was considered a c

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread Bartłomiej Piotrowski
On 2013-03-11 21:24, member graysky wrote: > Hi All. Inspired by Allan's talk @ SINFO XX, I decided to throw my > hat into the ring and formally apply to be a TU. My linux history > started with RH and SUSE over a decade ago. I discovered Debian and > Ubuntu. I found myself wanting more control

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread SanskritFritz
If my opinion as a mere arch user counts for anything in this thread, I'd like to express my gratitude towards graysky for his linux-ck repository and AUR packages. I'm running that kernel without any problem since 2011-04-10 (from my pacman.log). Honestly when I saw his email about applying as a T

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-12 Thread Connor Behan
On 11/03/13 05:52 PM, Dave Reisner wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 04:24:31PM -0400, member graysky wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi All. Inspired by Allan's talk @ SINFO XX, I decided to throw my >> hat into the ring and formally apply to be a TU. My linux his

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread Xyne
Dave Reisner wrote: I'd like to address a few points. >I'm replying to the rest of this with full disclosure: graysky asked me >to sponsor him first, and I've declined based on a lack of skill and >what I feel isn't necessarily the correct attitude for an Arch TU. I was not aware of this and I a

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread Dave Reisner
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 04:24:31PM -0400, member graysky wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi All. Inspired by Allan's talk @ SINFO XX, I decided to throw my > hat into the ring and formally apply to be a TU. My linux history > started with RH and SUSE over a decade ag

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread member graysky
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Daniel Wallace wrote: > What type of packages do you plan on maintaining and what would you want > to move into the repos first? Good question. For starters, several I use all the time and that have the requisite # of votes: alsi archey3 celtx modprobed_db monit

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread David Benfell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 3/11/2013 3:04 PM, William Giokas wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 05:58:27PM -0400, member graysky wrote: >> Try two using gmail to send an clearsigned message to this >> list... > > Still bad. Try using a client, like Thunderbird or Mutt. I can >

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread Daniel Wallace
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:11:50PM -0400, member graysky wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 6:04 PM, William Giokas <1007...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 05:58:27PM -0400, member graysky wrote: > >> Try two using gmail to send an clearsigned message to this list... > > > > Still bad.

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread Xyne
member graysky wrote: >On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 6:04 PM, William Giokas <1007...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 05:58:27PM -0400, member graysky wrote: >>> Try two using gmail to send an clearsigned message to this list... >> >> Still bad. Try using a client, like Thunderbird or Mutt.

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread William Giokas
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 06:11:50PM -0400, member graysky wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 6:04 PM, William Giokas <1007...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 05:58:27PM -0400, member graysky wrote: > >> Try two using gmail to send an clearsigned message to this list... > > > > Still bad.

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread member graysky
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 6:04 PM, William Giokas <1007...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 05:58:27PM -0400, member graysky wrote: >> Try two using gmail to send an clearsigned message to this list... > > Still bad. Try using a client, like Thunderbird or Mutt. I can only > vouch for Mutt

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread Xyne
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Hash: SHA1 > >Try two using gmail to send an clearsigned message to this list... > >Hi All. Inspired by Allan's talk @ SINFO XX, I decided to throw my >hat into the ring and formally apply to be a TU. My linux history >started with RH and SUSE over a decade ag

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread William Giokas
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 05:58:27PM -0400, member graysky wrote: > Try two using gmail to send an clearsigned message to this list... Still bad. Try using a client, like Thunderbird or Mutt. I can only vouch for Mutt in respect to signing well. > > Hi All. Inspired by Allan's talk @ SINFO XX, I

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread member graysky
Sorry gang, apparently as Florian suggested, gmail is doing something to the signed message rendering the signature "BAD." I am trying now to directly attach the asc file to see if it works before trying a non-http based email client. Here goes... -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tr

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread member graysky
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Try two using gmail to send an clearsigned message to this list... Hi All. Inspired by Allan's talk @ SINFO XX, I decided to throw my hat into the ring and formally apply to be a TU. My linux history started with RH and SUSE over a decade ago. I di

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread Xyne
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Florian Pritz wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi All. > >Your signature is bad; gmail probably mangled something. > >Please resend using GPG/MIME (at least enigmail with thunderbird, >claws-mail, kmail support it).

Re: [aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread Florian Pritz
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi All. Your signature is bad; gmail probably mangled something. Please resend using GPG/MIME (at least enigmail with thunderbird, claws-mail, kmail support it). signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[aur-general] TU application from graysky

2013-03-11 Thread member graysky
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi All. Inspired by Allan's talk @ SINFO XX, I decided to throw my hat into the ring and formally apply to be a TU. My linux history started with RH and SUSE over a decade ago. I discovered Debian and Ubuntu. I found myself wanting more control and