"Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2. new box for 'doze heads called unstable.apache.org that runs WIN
> XP or something that they can log into and do for themselves
It'll be a cold day in hell. ;-)
--
Daniel Rall
> "Andrew C. Oliver" wrote:
> >
> > So why don't you go next...with the introductions...
>
> who, me? heh. everyone knows me; i'm the git with the big mouth. :-/
hmm, i thought you were just the nice old man, Ken :)
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
* On 2002-10-25 at 22:53,
Erik Abele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> excited the electrons to say:
Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
developer-/committer-lists? It seems that Greg's and Stefano's postings
did not really reach all the committers out the
"Andrew C. Oliver" wrote:
>
> >who, me? heh. everyone knows me; i'm the git with the big mouth. :-/
> >
> >
> With that description (remember that negativity was supposed to be left
> on reorg@) they might confuse you for me ;-)
oh, all right..
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinin
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
"Andrew C. Oliver" wrote:
So why don't you go next...with the introductions...
who, me? heh. everyone knows me; i'm the git with the big mouth. :-/
With that description (remember that negativity was supposed to be left
on reorg@) they might confuse you f
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> This is a symptom of having certain constituency that fails the basic
> UNIX literacy test. So ssh'ing to a UNIX box and creating a .forward
> file is difficult.
>
> solution:
Solution is that when a new person is voted for committership, they are
indeed. i have a more-than-sneaking suspicion that an awful lot
of [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses don't reach their owners. i think
that's something that should be fixed, since it means they're
not being notified of things sent to committers@, which by
definition concern them..
so by all means the
"Andrew C. Oliver" wrote:
>
> So why don't you go next...with the introductions...
who, me? heh. everyone knows me; i'm the git with the big mouth. :-/
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Mill
* On 2002-10-25 at 22:53,
Erik Abele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> excited the electrons to say:
>
> Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
> developer-/committer-lists? It seems that Greg's and Stefano's postings
> did not really reach all the committers out there ;-(
indeed. i ha
On Saturday, October 26, 2002, at 04:32 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Well, I for one am pretty amazed this thread forked back onto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
yes...lets squash it with your introduction :-)
I hate writing about myself. I've been around Apache on and off since
March or April 1995. I built th
Well, I for one am pretty amazed this thread forked back onto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
yes...lets squash it with your introduction :-)
Chuck
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Saturday, October 26, 2002, at 02:25 AM, Peter Donald wrote:
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 19:03, David Reid wrote:
I do find it fascinating to note the active participants in this
discussion
now. They've changed dramatically from the start of this discussion
and now
seem to be heavily "Jakarta" orient
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 19:03, David Reid wrote:
>
> I do find it fascinating to note the active participants in this discussion
> now. They've changed dramatically from the start of this discussion and now
> seem to be heavily "Jakarta" oriented while the people who started this
> discussion have lar
I do find it fascinating to note the active participants in this discussion
now. They've changed dramatically from the start of this discussion and now
seem to be heavily "Jakarta" oriented while the people who started this
discussion have largely left as the volume has increased and the topics
s
Or, most people just want to be left alone to write code. :-)
Amen :)
And remain committers without wanting to becoming members; they just
can't stand these time-consuming "politics".
why there are no politics in the sourceforge cvs repository ;-)
generally no community either... ;-)
If true, this should induce a certain conservatism of approach in
those who are driving the reorg aganda. There's a silent majority out
there who just getting on with the code.
Peter
So now we're sampling Richard Nixon ;-)
> David Reid wrote:
> >>On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Erik Abele wrote:
> >>
> >>> From a moderators POV I can say, that mostly the people which are
> >>>subscribed to reorg@ have also joined [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>
> >>>Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
> >>>developer-/committer-li
David Reid wrote:
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Erik Abele wrote:
From a moderators POV I can say, that mostly the people which are
subscribed to reorg@ have also joined [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
developer-/committer-lists? It seems that Greg's and Stefano'
David Reid wrote:
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Erik Abele wrote:
From a moderators POV I can say, that mostly the people which are
subscribed to reorg@ have also joined [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
developer-/committer-lists? It seems that Greg's and Stefano
go for it.
Erik Abele wrote:
From a moderators POV I can say, that mostly the people which are
subscribed to reorg@ have also joined [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
developer-/committer-lists? It seems that Greg's and Stefano's
postings did not reall
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Erik Abele wrote:
>
> > From a moderators POV I can say, that mostly the people which are
> > subscribed to reorg@ have also joined [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
> > developer-/committer-lists? It seems that Greg's and S
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Erik Abele wrote:
From a moderators POV I can say, that mostly the people which are
subscribed to reorg@ have also joined [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
developer-/committer-lists? It seems that Greg's a
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Erik Abele wrote:
> From a moderators POV I can say, that mostly the people which are
> subscribed to reorg@ have also joined [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
> developer-/committer-lists? It seems that Greg's and Stefano's p
From a moderators POV I can say, that mostly the people which are
subscribed to reorg@ have also joined [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perhaps we should propose another posting on the different
developer-/committer-lists? It seems that Greg's and Stefano's postings
did not really reach all the committers ou
More than a fifth of the committers already? That's
pretty impressive.
--- Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Andrew C. Oliver" wrote:
> >
> > No we settled down util we had more
> subscribers Ken, are we
> > subscribed up yet?
>
> 124 subscribers at present. as opposed
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
"Andrew C. Oliver" wrote:
No we settled down util we had more subscribers Ken, are we
subscribed up yet?
124 subscribers at present. as opposed to 127 on reorg@, and
579 on committers@ total.
So why don't you go next...with the introductions...
"Andrew C. Oliver" wrote:
>
> No we settled down util we had more subscribers Ken, are we
> subscribed up yet?
124 subscribers at present. as opposed to 127 on reorg@, and
579 on committers@ total.
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer
So lets continue with the introductions. I've already had some great
conversations from mine.. Lets hear it.
Morgan Delagrange wrote:
Unless you're specifically interested in an
archive-like format, I think we're still discussing
most of the big issues. You might be able to just
jump in and ca
Unless you're specifically interested in an
archive-like format, I think we're still discussing
most of the big issues. You might be able to just
jump in and catch much of the gist.
--- Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there an archive for reorg?
>
> 10/25/2002 5:23:09 PM, Morgan Delag
l Message-
> From: David Reid [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 23:35
> To: community@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Man, it's quiet here
>
>
> You say it like that's a bad thing?? :)
>
> david
>
> - Original Message -
>
not a web archive. Just the nasty (no so)ezmlm interface.
Ted Husted wrote:
Is there an archive for reorg?
10/25/2002 5:23:09 PM, Morgan Delagrange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
All the action is still on reorg. Too much action,
it's cutting into my productivity big time.
- Morgan
--- Chuck Mur
Is there an archive for reorg?
10/25/2002 5:23:09 PM, Morgan Delagrange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>All the action is still on reorg. Too much action,
>it's cutting into my productivity big time.
>
>- Morgan
>
>--- Chuck Murcko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Maybe I hadn't failed to subscribe af
You say it like that's a bad thing?? :)
david
- Original Message -
From: "Chuck Murcko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 10:21 PM
Subject: Man, it's quiet here
> Maybe I hadn't failed to subscribe after all.
>
> I su
All the action is still on reorg. Too much action,
it's cutting into my productivity big time.
- Morgan
--- Chuck Murcko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe I hadn't failed to subscribe after all.
>
> I suppose there'd be a better draw if we had named
> it revolution@, or
> cagematch@, or somet
Chuck Murcko wrote:
Maybe I hadn't failed to subscribe after all.
I suppose there'd be a better draw if we had named it revolution@, or
cagematch@, or something. But that's just me being a tweaker. 8^)
I sure do hope it perks up around here, though. It would be a Bad Sign
if it didn't.
Chuck
--
Maybe I hadn't failed to subscribe after all.
I suppose there'd be a better draw if we had named it revolution@, or
cagematch@, or something. But that's just me being a tweaker. 8^)
I sure do hope it perks up around here, though. It would be a Bad Sign
if it didn't.
Chuck
36 matches
Mail list logo
