Christopher Faylor wrote:
Otherwise, MaxB has
disqualified himself from doxygen package maintainership,
I would to appeal this, please, because I do not believe it is fair to
censure me for a misunderstanding that I have explained and apologized for.
The fact that a few words of mild intention
Max,
no - you have not disqualified yourself in my eyes.
And therefore, you should be the new doxygen owner/maintainer if you want it
that badly.
I also think that we should put this issue finally to rest, stop pouting and
get on with life!
greets,
H.
Max Bowsher wrote:
Christopher Faylor
On May 3 13:02, Max Bowsher wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
The fact that a few words of mild intention can be misinterpreted and seed
an accidental high tension mess has been amply well demonstrated on the
cygwin list recently, in the CGF/GRVS thread.
So you're comparing your specific
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 04:51:46PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On May 3 13:02, Max Bowsher wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
The fact that a few words of mild intention can be misinterpreted and
seed an accidental high tension mess has been amply well demonstrated
on the cygwin list recently,
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On May 3 13:02, Max Bowsher wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
The fact that a few words of mild intention can be misinterpreted and
seed
an accidental high tension mess has been amply well demonstrated on the
cygwin list recently, in the CGF/GRVS thread.
So you're
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 9:52 AM
To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Counter-ITP of doxygen (was: Re: Please upload:
doxygen-1.4.2_20050410-1 (n'th take))
On May 3 13:02
[snip]
So you're comparing your specific situation with Gary's years long
history of adding useless comments to cgf's postings in the Cygwin
ML?
Ahem, yeah, let's make that: ...Gary's years long history
of taking
Chris to task for his years-long history of uncalled-for
snotty
KOOK com
Subject: Re: Counter-ITP of doxygen (was: Re: Please upload:
doxygen-1.4.2_20050410-1 (n'th take))
On May 3 13:02, Max Bowsher wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
The fact that a few words of mild intention can be
misinterpreted and
seed an accidental high tension mess has
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 12:26:20PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
FWIW, I fully support your stance that your unilaterally-imposed
disqualification was unwarranted. At the same time, it's not
difficult to understand Hans' consternation and reaction to the
situation. Doxygen is a very useful
On May 3 12:26, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
FWIW, I fully support your stance that your unilaterally-imposed
disqualification was unwarranted. At the same time, it's not difficult to
understand Hans' consternation and reaction to the situation. Doxygen is a
very useful package, and it would
Christopher Faylor wrote:
I've waited several days to respond to this because I wanted to make
sure that I was in the proper emotional state and didn't just fire off a
knee-jerk reaction.
Ditto.
Nevertheless, I remain appalled by this turn of events. I saw nothing
in Hans' email which indicated
On Apr 25 14:09, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 12:35:19AM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
Accordingly, I hereby ITP doxygen myself:
I've waited several days to respond to this because I wanted to make
sure that I was in the proper emotional state and didn't just fire off a
Chris, Corinna Max,
thanks but no thanks.
I had a real rough start with this, which utterly discouraged me and
dampened my enthusiasm to maintain
anything at this time considerably!
So please consider doxygen and bash to be up again for grabs!
As far as I am concerned, can't you just let Max be
On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 12:35:19AM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
Hans W. Horn wrote:
Alright,
Max Bowsher wrote:
No, still wrong. You didn't read what I said carefully enough.
You *need* to understand:
Filenames are expected to be EXACTLY:
NAME-VERSION-RELEASE.tar.bz2
NAME-VERSION-RELEASE-src.tar.bz2
Hans W. Horn wrote:
Alright,
Max Bowsher wrote:
No, still wrong. You didn't read what I said carefully enough.
You *need* to understand:
Filenames are expected to be EXACTLY:
NAME-VERSION-RELEASE.tar.bz2
NAME-VERSION-RELEASE-src.tar.bz2
I guess I never appreciated the subtle naming convention used
Hans W. Horn wrote:
Max Bowsher wrote:
...
Having got the superficial naming problems out of the way, I took a
closer look at the source packaging.
There were many issues - the most serious being that the source
package did not even contain the Cygwin specific readme at all - and
hear - hear (you
Max Bowsher wrote:
Hans W. Horn wrote:
Max Bowsher wrote:
...
Having got the superficial naming problems out of the way, I took a
closer look at the source packaging.
Superficial? In your earlier complaints you made it sound as if those naming
issues were of utmost importance!
There were many
Max Bowsher wrote:
...
Having got the superficial naming problems out of the way, I took a
closer look at the source packaging.
There were many issues - the most serious being that the source
package did not even contain the Cygwin specific readme at all - and
hear - hear (you didn't look, did
18 matches
Mail list logo
