So, I'm pretty much just pointlessly repeating things I've already said
at this point (who would've thought? participating in public discussion
on a Debian list being an utterly pointless endeavour? astounding), so I
can't see much point continuing; but I figure this first section could
at leas
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 06:27:52PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Joel Aelwyn wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:53:47AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >>martin f krafft wrote:
> >>>Maybe we should tabulate most commonly bashed roles and see if there
> >>>is a correlation with inavailability of inf
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.17.1402 +0100]:
> I find it somewhat disturbing that the cabal even exists. Is Debian
> a two-class society? Many people are by far more experienced with
> the inner workings of Debian, and thus they hold positions of
> influence. However, al
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17-02-2005 12:52, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I'm really not sure why anyone thinks tacking requests onto paranoid
> accusations of people being in unaccountable supersecretive cabals
> that
> don't share the Debian spirit is a good idea
also sprach Anthony Towns [2005.02.17.1307 +0100]:
> Can you possibly conceive there might perhaps be some other
> explanation for why I'm not writing tediously long emails or
> involved in heated debates about what changes to the archive
> should or shouldn't happen?
Sure I can; which is why I w
martin f krafft wrote:
Then I wrote an email, which, I give you that, was below the
waisteline, but look at the effect: every constructive post
following my initial message came from people wondering what
ftpmasters are and what they are doing.
So, what, exactly did those posts "construct"?
Certain
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On 17-02-2005 06:17, Anthony Towns wrote:
Then how about spending a little time thinking, first? Seriously, this
isn't a debating exercise here; I'm not putting words together just to
see how they sound.
Why would you /possibly/ imagine retitling the thread would make any
su
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17-02-2005 06:17, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
>> On 17-02-2005 02:43, Anthony Towns wrote:
>>
>>> Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>>
Here is a fresh non-APT non-hostile thread. Please respond...
>>>
>>> Dude, if a new thread was
On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 02:48:25PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 February 2005 09:45 am, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > You can probably work with package tags to do so after some configuration
> > > to tag-base
also sprach Anthony Towns [2005.02.17.0252 +0100]:
> That, eg, you can't manage to think about apt 0.6 without wanting
> to move the topic to ftpmaster bashing just confirms that
> assumption.
I was trying to move forward in the way I would have moved forward
if I had to get things done quickly;
Joel Aelwyn wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 11:53:47AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
martin f krafft wrote:
Maybe we should tabulate most commonly bashed roles and see if there
is a correlation with inavailability of information?
What would be the point? That would tell us nothing about causation,
wh
11 matches
Mail list logo
