On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 05:17:55PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Duncan Findlay writes ("Re: Disputes between developers - content, draft #4"):
> > Other considerations, many of these are taken from Branden Robinson,
> > whose e-mails you don't seem to read anymore:
&g
Duncan Findlay writes ("Re: Disputes between developers - content, draft #4"):
> Other considerations, many of these are taken from Branden Robinson,
> whose e-mails you don't seem to read anymore:
...
> 2) You need to explain what you mean by the Project Leadership
> ex
Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: Disputes between developers - content, draft #4"):
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > My experience is that sensible conversations about eg bug
> > reports can easily become derailed by categorical statements
> > like
On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 10:53:13AM +, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> I think the amount of heat generated in this thread is enough to
> suggest that Debian needs to think a little about how its developers
> interact with each other.
Do you have any concrete suggestions? :)
--
G. Branden Robinson
Chris Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IMHO this is much more likely to be effective if you first get a
> consensus that there is, in fact, a problem that needs to be dealt
> with. The posts in the other thread suggest you haven't got such an
> agreement.
I think the amount of heat generat
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 12:00:47AM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> 2) It is now widely accepted that you should only use one space
> between sentences. Although many sources say that either one or two is
> fine, most recommend only one space. The Modern Language Association's
> FAQ http://www.mla.or
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 08:42:46AM -0600, Colin Watson wrote:
> Ian has been keen on getting feedback from the bug tracking system
> administrators, and has asked a couple of times now. So far I haven't
> tried to respond with that hat on because:
>
> * there doesn't seem to be anywhere near to
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 12:00:47AM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> Many of my modifications have been grammar related. I agree with
> Branden's comments (although I think he may have phrased them a little
> harshly) regarding personal idiosyncrasies in your writing. Read the
> diff to see my suggest
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 09:39:25PM -0600, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> IMHO this is much more likely to be effective if you first get a
> consensus that there is, in fact, a problem that needs to be dealt
> with. The posts in the other thread suggest you haven't got such an
> agreement.
Frankly, I thi
Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Nov 2002 00:00:47 -0500,
> Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2) It is now widely accepted that you should only use one space
> > between sentences. Although many sources say that either one or two is
> > fine, most recommend only one space. The Modern Lan
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002 00:00:47 -0500,
Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2) It is now widely accepted that you should only use one space
> between sentences. Although many sources say that either one or two is
> fine, most recommend only one space. The Modern Language Association's
> FAQ http
Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: Disputes between developers - content, draft #4"):
> > 6. Bug report etiquette
...
> > [...] Bug reports are `todo list' items for the whole Project
>
> I strongly disagree. The Bug list is a communications
> mechanism that
>>"Ian" == Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> I think you must have a different experience to me. I've found
Ian> that many developers don't seem to share enough of the context
Ian> and unspoken rules.
I agree that develoeprs may come from different cultures and
contexts --
>>"Ian" == Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> Hamish Moffatt writes ("Re: Disputes between developers - content, draft
#4"):
>> This seems to imply that only developers submit bugs. Although your
>> document is specifically about co
Hamish Moffatt writes ("Re: Disputes between developers - content, draft #4"):
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 03:09:53AM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > 6. Bug report etiquette
> [...]
> > * [...] The matter should be debated until both Developers are
> > happy.
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think you must have a different experience to me. I've found that
> many developers don't seem to share enough of the context and unspoken
> rules. I think writing them down will help. I also think it might
> produce some useful pressure on those peopl
Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: Disputes between developers - content, draft #4"):
> Well, here is a detailed critique. Unfortunately, there is a
> lot of ground to cover between our positions; here is a start.
Thanks.
Much of what you say can be summed up, I think, by the
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 03:09:53AM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> 6. Bug report etiquette
[...]
> * The bug was reported; the maintainer felt immediately that it was a
> spurious bug report of some kind, and closed it, but the submitter
> disagrees with the explanation and has reopened the report fo
Hi,
Well, here is a detailed critique. Unfortunately, there is a
lot of ground to cover between our positions; here is a start.
>>"Ian" == Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> A *DRAFT* recommendation by the Technical Committee.
Which has not yet said it approved of t
>>"Chris" == Chris Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Chris> IMHO this is much more likely to be effective if you first get a
Chris> consensus that there is, in fact, a problem that needs to be dealt
Chris> with. The posts in the other thread suggest you haven't got such an
Chris> agreement
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam Heath) writes:
> So, I guess what I am saying, is that this document, while good in idea, is
> already taken care of, by the ctte itself. We don't need this document.
> It's all really just common sense, anyways.
I disagree.
My recent face to face meetings with Debia
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 10:24:39PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> > I also believe the technical committee is an inappropriate organ to be
> > making such a pronouncement, particularly since this is an inherently
> > non-technical matter. Then again, since t
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 03:09:53AM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Here is my current working draft. I'd like to encourage anyone who
> has any substantive opinions about it, positive and negative, to let
> us know. If you have something interesting to add to the discussion,
> please post it.
My big
On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> IMHO this is much more likely to be effective if you first get a
> consensus that there is, in fact, a problem that needs to be dealt
> with. The posts in the other thread suggest you haven't got such an
> agreement.
Exactly. Point number one. Give t
IMHO this is much more likely to be effective if you first get a
consensus that there is, in fact, a problem that needs to be dealt
with. The posts in the other thread suggest you haven't got such an
agreement.
I also believe the technical committee is an inappropriate organ to be
making such a p
Here is my current working draft. I'd like to encourage anyone who
has any substantive opinions about it, positive and negative, to let
us know. If you have something interesting to add to the discussion,
please post it.
The previous discussion has been sidetracked into a rather heated
side-issu
26 matches
Mail list logo
