Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> So you still could (and perhaps should[0]) reconsider not to leave
> Debian.
> Guess you've read the lists and saw how many people were emotionally
> hit and upset about this.
Joey, I beg you too. Please reconsider.
Still, if it's not fun anymore by all means run
Hey Joey,
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 06:12:13PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Please take that message with a pound of salt. I was upset when I wrote
> it, it's probably not accurate, and I've left[1] for reasons that are
> much more broadly structural, and are certianly not the fault of the
> technical
On Sun, 2014-11-09 at 22:38 +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> I can completely understand why we (and that includes me) want systemd
> as a default: it gives the best possible integration of desktop
> components possible.
I even think it's best on a server (that means, if it was used as it
could be)..
On Sun, 2014-11-09 at 18:12 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> I've left[1]
+
>Almost.
So you still could (and perhaps should[0]) reconsider not to leave
Debian.
Guess you've read the lists and saw how many people were emotionally hit
and upset about this.
(well I think it's worth a try ^^)
Cheers,
Ch
Michael Gilbert wrote:
> How can you possibly think no more need said? You are one of four
> complicit in the act that finally pushed Joey over the edge [0].
>
> [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/11/msg00045.html
Please take that message with a pound of salt. I was upset when I wrote
2014-11-10 0:38 GMT+03:00 Simon Richter :
> automake
With autotools one can always use plain shell code in configure.ac and
plain make in Makefile.am ;-)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On 09.11.2014 04:57, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> In the end it's quite easy: sysvinit has many deficiencies ans
> missing feature, systemd is superior in all places.
- From your perspective.
I can completely understand why we (and that in
On 2014-11-09 18:19, Adam Borowski wrote:
And since changing the init system on
existing installations is an important _technical_ problem, it is in
scope
for the CTTE.
Where does the constitution make "important technical problems" in scope
for the tech committee? (Not being awkward, but th
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 12:54:39PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Ralf Jung wrote:
> > I read Joey's message over and over without getting any more clues. He
> > said the CTTE has "Decided it should make a decision", which it seems to
> > me it did not. So I probab
On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Ralf Jung wrote:
> I read Joey's message over and over without getting any more clues. He
> said the CTTE has "Decided it should make a decision", which it seems to
> me it did not. So I probably misunderstood something more fundamental here.
Read all of #762194 ve
Hi,
On 09/11/14 07:28, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
>> On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 23:30 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>>> No accusation, just a statement of fact. Four ctte members were
>>> complicit in the vote [0]
>>
>> Well maybe I read t
Le samedi 08 novembre 2014 à 23:30 -0500, Michael Gilbert a écrit :
> No, the fire is not systemd, it is the politicization of the project
> via ctte and GR rather than patient evolution of the best technical
> solution.
You are definitely right. However, I think we would all appreciate if
you co
On 11/08/2014 at 10:57 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> In the end it's quite easy: sysvinit has many deficiencies ans
> missing feature, systemd is superior in all places.
On 11/09/2014 at 12:01 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> All of these systems were capable of booting a Linux,...
On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 23:30 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>> No accusation, just a statement of fact. Four ctte members were
>> complicit in the vote [0]
>
> Well maybe I read that ruling wrong, but didn't it more or less say
> "we
On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 23:30 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> No accusation, just a statement of fact. Four ctte members were
> complicit in the vote [0]
Well maybe I read that ruling wrong, but didn't it more or less say
"we're not deciding anything right now"?
And even if that decision would be
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 22:32 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>> You are one of four
>> complicit in the act that finally pushed Joey over the edge [0].
>
> Don't you think it goes a bit far to personally accusing some people of
> this?
On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 22:32 -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> You are one of four
> complicit in the act that finally pushed Joey over the edge [0].
Don't you think it goes a bit far to personally accusing some people of
this?
I guess Joey was long enough in the business to have known how to deal
wi
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> zlatan writes:
>
>> In advance sorry for all spelling mistake that I will write as I am
>> writing from my phone and I am not a native English speaker.
>
> [...]
>
> And yet, I don't see how it could have been said better. Thank you so
> much f
18 matches
Mail list logo
