On 12/14/05, Andreas Schuldei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
actually, NetApp (the storage company) and Intel (the chip
manufacture) are solving this problem for us. we get a 7 or
10Tbyte storage from NetApp and two beefy servers to use as a
front end for both CD/DVD generation and serving of
* Andrew Saunders ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061220 16:20]:
On 12/14/05, Andreas Schuldei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
actually, NetApp (the storage company) and Intel (the chip
manufacture) are solving this problem for us. we get a 7 or
10Tbyte storage from NetApp and two beefy servers to use as a
Steve Langasek writes (Re: Complaint about #debian operator):
As absurd as Andrew's comparison may seem, the diffs distributed from
http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/ are pretty underwhelming as far as
contributing back to Debian is concerned. [...]
I agree. That patch archive may
Matthew Palmer writes (Re: Ubuntu/Debian cooperation [was: Complaint about
#debian operator]):
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 10:50:54AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
It irritates us all. But I'd rather have substandard patches submitted
(just don't expect me to not go medieval
Hello,
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:55:45PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
They could just as well do their changes directly in the debian archive, and
have the ubuntu guys only recompile, or maintain the ubuntu-specific patches
which should *not* go into debian. That is provided the debian
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 03:26:09PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
I have no idea how ubuntu works internally, but my believe, since they
(canonical) pay people all around the world, and they don't have structures
locally to do the official hiring, they are forced to hire
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 08:29:20AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 10:00:22PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 15.12.2005, 15:39 +0100 schrieb Sven Luther:
Sounds like a very good idea, and fully in the scope of Utnubu. Some
questions:
* Is it common
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Joachim Breitner wrote:
I don't think there is much gain - an attached patch is not much better
than a link, and might annoy people with limited bandwidth.
It is *MUCH* better to attach a patch than to paste a link, unless as others
said, you're talking about 1MB
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 01:06:51PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:57:12PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
I don't disagree. I would much rather every ubuntu change had a
corresponding patch filed in the BTS,
Every relevant change put into the BTS would be nice, yes.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 04:17:32 +0100
Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 01:06:51PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
There's I screwed up because I made a mistake, and there's I
screwed up because I don't actually know what
On 12/15/05, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 01:06:51PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:57:12PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
I don't disagree. I would much rather every ubuntu change had a
corresponding patch filed in the BTS,
Every
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 11:57:37AM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On 12/15/05, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 01:06:51PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:57:12PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
I don't disagree. I would much rather every
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 04:17:32AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 01:06:51PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
There's I screwed up because I made a mistake, and there's I screwed up
because I don't actually know what I'm doing, but I screwed up because I
didn't care about
On Thursday 15 December 2005 11:57, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Please give a reference to this directive. I am part of the MOTU team,
and have never heared about such a directive.
May be I've been a FUD victim too, but I've also heard that directive some
months ago.
Best regards
--
Isaac
On 12/15/05, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Every relevant change put into the BTS would be nice, yes. Filing
Notice that it is official ubuntu directive to *NOT* do that, that is to
not
send patches directly to the BTS,
Please give a reference to this directive. I am
On 12/15/05, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is their choice to fork with (possibly) too small manpower to keep
up.
They could just as well do their changes directly in the debian archive, and
have the ubuntu guys only recompile, or maintain the ubuntu-specific patches
which should
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:18:16PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
They could just as well do their changes directly in the debian archive, and
have the ubuntu guys only recompile, or maintain the ubuntu-specific patches
which should *not* go into debian.
A good idea for Ubuntu to ease this would be
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:46:41PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
It is true that some MOTUs don't consider submitting
to debian bts as priority because of bad experiences they had because
of unresponsive and unhelpful Debian Maintainers.
How much extra work is it to submit a patch one has
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Matthew Palmer wrote:
OTOH, I've seen a number of ubuntu patches which were blatantly wrong,
where the maintainer clearly didn't grok the package they were changing.
*This* irritates me mightily. The reason, as given by a MOTU when I asked
It irritates us all. But
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 10:50:54AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Matthew Palmer wrote:
OTOH, I've seen a number of ubuntu patches which were blatantly wrong,
where the maintainer clearly didn't grok the package they were changing.
*This* irritates me
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:46:41PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On 12/15/05, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Every relevant change put into the BTS would be nice, yes. Filing
Notice that it is official ubuntu directive to *NOT* do that, that is
to not
send patches
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:55:45PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On 12/15/05, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is their choice to fork with (possibly) too small manpower to keep
up.
They could just as well do their changes directly in the debian archive, and
have the ubuntu
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:12:35PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
That said, it may be different for ubuntu employees and random
maintainers.
Ubuntu does not have any employees.
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
[Andreas Schuldei pisze na temat Re: snapshot.d.n (was: Complaint about
#debian operator)]:
actually, NetApp (the storage company) and Intel (the chip
manufacture) are solving this problem for us. we get a 7 or
10Tbyte storage from NetApp and two beefy servers to use as a
front end for both
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:40:37PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:12:35PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
That said, it may be different for ubuntu employees and random
maintainers.
Ubuntu does not have any employees.
Canoncal has.
Greetings
Marc, suppressing the remark
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:54:11PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
If the ubuntu patch database is public, and the patches therein
DFSG-free licensed, why don#t we establish an automatism which moves
patches from the Ubuntu patch database to the Debian BTS?
The Utnubu[1] project was started at
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:40:37PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:12:35PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
That said, it may be different for ubuntu employees and random
maintainers.
Ubuntu does not have any employees.
Those guys that get money for ubuntu work. No need to
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 03:00:29PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:54:11PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
If the ubuntu patch database is public, and the patches therein
DFSG-free licensed, why don#t we establish an automatism which moves
patches from the Ubuntu
On 12/15/05, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ubuntu is setup internally to circumvent social charges
I don't understand this statement. Could you please explain what you mean?
--
Andrew Saunders
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 03:00:26PM +, Andrew Saunders wrote:
On 12/15/05, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ubuntu is setup internally to circumvent social charges
I don't understand this statement. Could you please explain what you mean?
I have no idea how ubuntu works internally,
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 03:00:26PM +, Andrew Saunders [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
On 12/15/05, Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ubuntu is setup internally to circumvent social charges
I don't understand this statement. Could you please explain what you mean?
My best
Sven Luther wrote:
I have no idea how ubuntu works internally, but my believe, since they
(canonical) pay people all around the world, and they don't have structures
locally to do the official hiring, they are forced to hire independent worker,
who pay their social charges and stuff
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Notice that it is official ubuntu directive to *NOT* do that, that is to not
send patches directly to the BTS,
Please give a reference to this directive. I am part of the MOTU team,
and have never heared about such a directive.
There was a large thread on
Hi,
(I just got the mails to utnubu-discuss, so bear with me)
Am Donnerstag, den 15.12.2005, 15:39 +0100 schrieb Sven Luther:
The process was to be manually though, the idea is to scan incoming mails to
the BTS, which would notice an URL to an ubuntu patch, and auto-attach it (and
complain
Joachim Breitner wrote:
I don't think there is much gain - an attached patch is not much better
than a link, and might annoy people with limited bandwidth.
It's SOP in Debian to attach patches to bug reports. I might consider
doing otherwise if the patch exceeded 1 megabyte.
(And yes, I'm on
Hi,
Am Donnerstag, den 15.12.2005, 16:13 -0500 schrieb Joey Hess:
Joachim Breitner wrote:
I don't think there is much gain - an attached patch is not much better
than a link, and might annoy people with limited bandwidth.
It's SOP in Debian to attach patches to bug reports. I might
On Thursday 15 December 2005 04:03 am, Marc Haber wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:18:16PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
They could just as well do their changes directly in the debian archive,
and have the ubuntu guys only recompile, or maintain the ubuntu-specific
patches which should *not*
Joachim Breitner wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 15.12.2005, 15:39 +0100 schrieb Sven Luther:
The process was to be manually though, the idea is to scan incoming mails to
the BTS, which would notice an URL to an ubuntu patch, and auto-attach it
(and
complain loudly to the submitter if the URL
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 10:00:22PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Hi,
(I just got the mails to utnubu-discuss, so bear with me)
Am Donnerstag, den 15.12.2005, 15:39 +0100 schrieb Sven Luther:
The process was to be manually though, the idea is to scan incoming mails to
the BTS, which
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 09:23:36PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thursday 15 December 2005 04:03 am, Marc Haber wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:18:16PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
They could just as well do their changes directly in the debian archive,
and have the ubuntu guys only
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 11:29:14AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 12:55:22PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
This says you are wrong:
http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/
So if I were to diff the Debian archive against the
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:29:21AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
As absurd as Andrew's comparison may seem, the diffs distributed from
http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/ are pretty underwhelming as far as
contributing back to Debian is concerned. Last time I poked at a package
diff
also sprach Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.14.1142 +0100]:
I believe this is due to snapshot.d.n having lost a considerable
amount of its archive. As those patches were generated from the
packages
... this makes me wonder why Canonical has not stepped in to support
snapshot.d.n.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 11:29:14AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 12:55:22PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
This says you are wrong:
* martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-14 12:10:30]:
also sprach Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.14.1142 +0100]:
I believe this is due to snapshot.d.n having lost a considerable
amount of its archive. As those patches were generated from the
packages
... this makes me
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:57:12PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
I don't disagree. I would much rather every ubuntu change had a
corresponding patch filed in the BTS,
Every relevant change put into the BTS would be nice, yes. Filing
everything in the BTS would result in a lot of patch,wontfix
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 01:06:51PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
There's I screwed up because I made a mistake, and there's I screwed up
because I don't actually know what I'm doing, but I screwed up because I
didn't care about doing a quality job is on a whole other level.
I have much
On Monday 12 December 2005 12:52 pm, Josh Rehman wrote:
And to quote
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ubuntu/relationship/document_view:
As a volunteer organization, Debian has historically been less good
at making time-based or predictable releases, and has a difficult time
providing
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 12:01:02AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Monday 12 December 2005 12:52 pm, Josh Rehman wrote:
And to quote
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ubuntu/relationship/document_view:
As a volunteer organization, Debian has historically been less good
at making time-based or
* Josh Rehman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005:12:12 12:52 -0800]:
You read the transcript: are you saying that you think your fellow
operator acted rightly?
As a fellow #debian operator, I have to say that I did agree with his
actions and probably would've been less patient.
--
off the chain like
Le lundi 12 décembre 2005 à 16:02 -0500, David Nusinow a écrit :
The result of this leads me to believe that most of the famed integration
going on in Ubuntu is the result of the eye-catching theme, the choice of a
single default desktop, and good marketing. I had hoped to install Ubuntu
on
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 10:29:26AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ubuntu tries so hard to be Debian without actually contributing back to=20
Debian. Let them compare on their own channel.
The above might variously be described as not entirely
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 12:55:22PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Saturday 10 December 2005 05:45 am, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.10.1358 +0100]:
So they can go join #ubuntu. Honestly, not that hard. Type
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 12:55:22PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
This says you are wrong:
http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/
So if I were to diff the Debian archive against the Fedora one, I'd be
contributing to Fedora? Cool! That'll bolster
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 11:29:14AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 12:55:22PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
This says you are wrong:
http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/
So if I were to diff the Debian archive against
Scripsit David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 01:59:05PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
I have been on #debian for a while, and I can understand that you
are fully booked. Still, #ubuntu is not the place to which we should
send people when they want Debian vs. Ubuntu
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.0112 +0100]:
Ubuntu tries so hard to be Debian without actually contributing
back to Debian. Let them compare on their own channel.
I can hardly imagine you actually have substance to back up these
claims. Of course, if you as a DD refuse
also sprach Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.10.1943 +0100]:
Wow, talk about self-defeating attitudes. Do you have a d-i patch
handy to turn away all new users from Debian?
No, of course I don't. And I was hoping my comment would be read
with a grain of salt. d-i is massively cool and it
On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 13:41 +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
But your post makes it all the more clear that *a lot* of Debian
people need to get the facts straight, and that a Debian vs. Ubuntu
comparison on #debian is definitely not out of place.
My biggest surprise whas that the channel
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 01:41:49PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.0112 +0100]:
Ubuntu tries so hard to be Debian without actually contributing
back to Debian. Let them compare on their own channel.
I can hardly imagine you actually have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Saturday 10 December 2005 05:45 am, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.10.1358 +0100]:
So they can go join #ubuntu. Honestly, not that hard. Type it
with me
also sprach David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.11.0539 +0100]:
Martin, I'd like for you to come in to #debian. Not for an hour or
a few hours, but for a few weeks to see what it's like. We have
consistently refused to support non-Debian distros for years,
including knoppix and ubuntu. We
also sprach Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.1431 +0100]:
Still, #ubuntu is not the place to which we should
send people when they want Debian vs. Ubuntu thoughts.
Respectfully: Why not?
Because the quality of information there won't be much better than
in Debian-forums --
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 01:59:05PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.11.0539 +0100]:
Martin, I'd like for you to come in to #debian. Not for an hour or
a few hours, but for a few weeks to see what it's like. We have
consistently refused to
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Because the quality of information there won't be much better than in
Debian-forums -- people are biased. I've witnessed quite some polemic
talk by Ubuntu users advocating their distro, somewhat reminiscent of
what I would have assumed to hear by
also sprach Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.1953 +0100]:
People who go to IRC and ask advocacy questions are fairly
unlikely to get high-quality information no matter where you send
them. At best, they'll end up sparking another one of these
interminable discussions like the one
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
also sprach Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.1953 +0100]:
People who go to IRC and ask advocacy questions are fairly unlikely to
get high-quality information no matter where you send them. At best,
they'll end up sparking another one of
also sprach Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.2053 +0100]:
Sure, but unless I misunderstood, your book wasn't about advocacy topics,
It surely included them. Anyway, this is going off-topic.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 09:42:14PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.2121 +0100]:
So when was the last time you tried installing Debian with this
task whose name you are not even sure of?
I don't think I ever installed the task myself, but
martin f krafft wrote:
I don't think I ever installed the task myself
Sigh, I rest my case. Thank god we have actual users who help us make
Debian better as opposed to developers who are too busy running ubuntu.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
also sprach David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.2202 +0100]:
I'd personally love to see more specific complaints about how
things could be improved.
I usually try to get those people to go into detail, or encourage
them to file bugs. However, plain users generally don't really
know how
also sprach Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.2208 +0100]:
Sigh, I rest my case. Thank god we have actual users who help us
make Debian better as opposed to developers who are too busy
running ubuntu.
Personal attacks aside, would you mind sharing what I missed? Does
the desktop task do
On 12/12/05, David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 01:59:05PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach David Nusinow [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.11.0539 +0100]:
Martin, I'd like for you to come in to #debian. Not for an hour or
a few hours, but for a few weeks to
martin f krafft wrote:
Personal attacks aside, would you mind sharing what I missed? Does
the desktop task do anything more than pull in some packages and let
them configure themselves? Will my experience differ if I install
the desktop task, or `apt-get install x-window-system kde gnome`
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 12:52:17PM -0800, Josh Rehman wrote:
read the transcript: are you saying that you think your fellow
operator acted rightly? Banning me when I was getting the information
I needed, not banning an obvious troll (deadcat), and finally banning
me before telling me where to
On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 21:42 +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.2121 +0100]:
So when was the last time you tried installing Debian with this
task whose name you are not even sure of?
I don't think I ever installed the task myself, but surely
I
Josh Rehman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This question, for me, is moot since I don't plan on using #debian IRC
again. I expected a level of maturity from a Debian representative
that I did not get.
Don't expect maturity on IRC and don't expect detailed development
or advocacy discussion welcomed in a
also sprach Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.12.2241 +0100]:
Yes, the Debian installer does a lot of things during the
installation of Debian with the desktop task that you will not get
if you just install packages with apt. One example is that our
X needs read-edid and mdetect to be
On Monday 12 December 2005 04:41 am, martin f krafft wrote:
But your post makes it all the more clear that *a lot* of Debian
people need to get the facts straight, and that a Debian vs. Ubuntu
comparison on #debian is definitely not out of place.
The problem with that, though, is the Ubuntu
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just to clarify for those following along at home, the first +q was
put in place for ten minutes as a time out to stop the off topic
discussion and ideally to get the participants to move to another
channel. (A +q silences the individual in question, while
Josh Rehman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As for being warned, I was told that because my discussion was about
ubuntu I should stop. Because I felt my discussion was not about
ubuntu, I did not feel that I should have to stop.
Then you needed to explain why, not just continue blindly and
rail against
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 11:16:19AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Telling a new user to shut up first thing is traditional troll
behavior [...]
Opening by asking whether anyone is alive is traditional troll
behaviour (is there anyone to annoy?),
It /might/ be traditional troll behaviour, it could
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005, MJ Ray wrote:
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(A +q silences the individual in question, while allowing them to
remain on the channel.)
+q is a bizarre half-ban flag which doesn't appear in many (any?)
IRC newbie guides, confuses some software and used to give
* David Nusinow:
Martin, I'd like for you to come in to #debian. Not for an hour or a few
hours, but for a few weeks to see what it's like. We have consistently
refused to support non-Debian distros for years, including knoppix and
ubuntu.
AFAICT, the question which sparked this thread was
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 01:14:34PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
IMHO, #debian-advocacy (if it exists) would be a better choice than
#ubuntu.
Totally, but somebody will have to operate that as well. I think nobody
wants to suppress these discussions entirely, but they are just not
manageable on
Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 11:16:19AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Opening by asking whether anyone is alive is traditional troll
behaviour (is there anyone to annoy?),
It /might/ be traditional troll behaviour, it could just be
unfamiliarity with IRC. [...]
If one
On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 02:43:51AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
[Obviously, if someone knows of such a resource, feel free to modify
the why debian factoid, or perhaps create a why not debian factoid
on the bot that points to a website or something that goes into this
topic in depth.]
I don't
On Saturday 10 December 2005 05:45 am, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.10.1358 +0100]:
So they can go join #ubuntu. Honestly, not that hard. Type it
with me now:
/join #ubuntu
Why should a Debian-Ubuntu comparison be any more on-topic on
On Saturday 10 December 2005 06:12 am, Michael Banck wrote:
You are welcome to idle in #debian and have a highlight on `ubuntu' to
address these questions, should you have the time.
I think whoever does that, and isn't paid to do so, will probably change that
to a trigger so whenever ubuntu
Perfect link, thanks so much. Perhaps Don can put that one under his belt.
On 12/11/05, Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 02:43:51AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
[Obviously, if someone knows of such a resource, feel free to modify
the why debian factoid, or
On Saturday 10 December 2005 04:57 am, Michael Banck wrote:
Don't know whether you send the guy a private message, but perhaps a
public message like foo: You have been silenced for 10 minutes due to
repeated off-topicness, despite warnings or so would be alright, so
they know it is not
On Saturday 10 December 2005 12:07 pm, Josh Rehman wrote:
As for being warned, I was told that because my discussion was about
ubuntu I should stop. Because I felt my discussion was not about
ubuntu, I did not feel that I should have to stop.
So you deliberately show newbie arrogance, get
On Sunday 11 December 2005 03:16 am, MJ Ray wrote:
Telling a new user to shut up first thing is traditional troll
behavior [...]
Opening by asking whether anyone is alive is traditional troll
behaviour (is there anyone to annoy?), possibly second only to a/s/l.
I don't know whether it
Hi Paul,
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 04:32:10PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
So you deliberately show newbie arrogance, get called on it, then
complain? Dude, you got what you deserved, now you're just
embarrassing yourself with how much you and most 13 year olds on AOL
have in common.
This is a
* Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005:12:11 16:32 -0800]:
On Saturday 10 December 2005 12:07 pm, Josh Rehman wrote:
As for being warned, I was told that because my discussion was about
ubuntu I should stop. Because I felt my discussion was not about
ubuntu, I did not feel that I should
Hi,
My apologies for sending this message here, but I wasn't sure where to
complain. I've been an off-and-on debian user over the years. Lately
I've used RedHat at work. I was thinking of trying Debian again, and
heard about Ubuntu. I could find very little on the web compairing
Ubuntu with
Hi,
On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 02:49:35AM -0800, Josh Rehman wrote:
My apologies for sending this message here, but I wasn't sure where to
complain. I've been an off-and-on debian user over the years. Lately
I've used RedHat at work. I was thinking of trying Debian again, and
heard about Ubuntu.
also sprach Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.12.10.1251 +0100]:
Looking at the log, your question was being addressed for 10 minutes
before you were silenced (definetely more than a word or two), and
dondelecaro gave you useful input as well. When the discussion seemed
to drift away, you
On Sat, 10 Dec 2005, martin f krafft wrote:
I think it would support Debian greatly if people would actually
understand what Ubuntu is all about, and how it differs from Debian.
After all, Ubuntu is not just another distribution.
I'd be more than happy to point people who have this sort of
On Sat, 10 Dec 2005, Michael Banck wrote:
Looking at the log, your question was being addressed for 10 minutes
before you were silenced (definetely more than a word or two), and
dondelecaro gave you useful input as well. When the discussion
seemed to drift away, you were advised to take it
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
