On 21/11/2007, martin f krafft wrote:
> Sam's mail was to James, CC the project. Don't you think that it's a
> little immature and definitely very premature to discuss the matter
> before James sent his own reply?
>
> Or is James a religious figure or helpless toddler that needs help
> defending h
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 02:06:57PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 November 2007 12:10, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Then the outcome should be reported. Not the beginning of a process.
>
> Sometimes it's very useful information too, to learn a process has been
> started. Or stalled.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Again: Information about facts the DPL is complaining about should
> > be regarded as important enough to make people feel that they have
> > some relevance for the project and thus should be shared amongst
> > people those who should know it (inclus
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : This is certainly no longer something
> : about which I can afford to wait 2 months between each answer
> : from you.
>
> I think Sam contacted several time elmo about the issue.
OK, thanks to both for pointing that out. Too subtle for me... m
Hi,
On Wednesday 21 November 2007 12:10, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Then the outcome should be reported. Not the beginning of a process.
Sometimes it's very useful information too, to learn a process has been
started. Or stalled. Or reached an important milestone. It's not always "the
result in t
On Wednesday 21 November 2007, MJ Ray wrote:
> martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sam's mail was to James, CC the project. Don't you think that it's
> > a little immature and definitely very premature to discuss the
> > matter before James sent his own reply?
>
> Yep. Hopefully a reply
MJ Ray wrote:
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sam's mail was to James, CC the project. Don't you think that it's
a little immature and definitely very premature to discuss the
matter before James sent his own reply?
Yep. Hopefully a reply will come. I also hope there was an attemp
Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 11:03:32AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Marc Haber wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 01:39:39AM +0100, Sam Hocevar wrote:
> > > >I also learned tonight that a few of the things I was complaining
> > > > about were being worked on (though I was
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Martin Schulze wrote:
Then the outcome should be reported. Not the beginning of a process.
To d-d-a yes, to those people who are gathering people or trying other
means to solve the problem (as the DPL did) it might be really useful
information that there is work in progre
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sam's mail was to James, CC the project. Don't you think that it's
> a little immature and definitely very premature to discuss the
> matter before James sent his own reply?
Yep. Hopefully a reply will come. I also hope there was an attempt
at private
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 11:03:32AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Marc Haber wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 01:39:39AM +0100, Sam Hocevar wrote:
> > >I also learned tonight that a few of the things I was complaining
> > > about were being worked on (though I was not aware of it),
> >
> > T
Andreas Tille wrote:
>> Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 11:03:32AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> The fact that the DPL does not know about important things going on
> with Debian is a strong indicator that there is something wrong with
> the communication behavior
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Martin Schulze wrote:
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 11:03:32AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
The fact that the DPL does not know about important things going on
with Debian is a strong indicator that there is something wrong with
the communication behavi
also sprach Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.11.21.1121 +0100]:
> > And please, don't pursue this argument, it's so ridiculous. Are you
> > really going to claim in the near future that there weren't
> > communication behavior issues between the project and DSA?
>
> Pot, kettle, black.
/m
Le mercredi 21 novembre 2007 à 11:21 +0100, Martin Schulze a écrit :
> I did not. What you consider important may not important to others.
And obviously some of the core teams don't consider as important some
things that are critical for the rest of the project.
--
.''`.
: :' : We are deb
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 11:03:32AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > The fact that the DPL does not know about important things going on
> > > with Debian is a strong indicator that there is something wrong with
> > > the communication behavior of people in key position
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Martin Schulze wrote:
I also learned tonight that a few of the things I was complaining
about were being worked on (though I was not aware of it),
The fact that the DPL does not know about important things going on
with Debian is a strong indicator that there is somethi
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 11:14:43AM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> However the project as a whole needs to know where its core teams are
> headed. The DPL looks like a relevant information hub for that purpose.
Needing an information hub (while we still have mailing lists) is a
certificate of po
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 10:03:32AM +, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Marc Haber wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 01:39:39AM +0100, Sam Hocevar wrote:
> > >I also learned tonight that a few of the things I was complaining
> > > about were being worked on (though I was not aware of it),
> >
> > T
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 11:03:32AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > The fact that the DPL does not know about important things going on
> > with Debian is a strong indicator that there is something wrong with
> > the communication behavior of people in key positions.
> The DPL does not need to know
Marc Haber wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 01:39:39AM +0100, Sam Hocevar wrote:
> >I also learned tonight that a few of the things I was complaining
> > about were being worked on (though I was not aware of it),
>
> The fact that the DPL does not know about important things going on
> with De
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 01:39:39AM +0100, Sam Hocevar wrote:
>I also learned tonight that a few of the things I was complaining
> about were being worked on (though I was not aware of it),
The fact that the DPL does not know about important things going on
with Debian is a strong indicator tha
On Tue, Nov 20, 2007, Leo costela Antunes wrote:
> I know I'm fighting against the natural tide here, but just I'm trying
> to stop a possible flamewar before it starts, if at all possible, so
> couldn't this issue (of which I have no particular knowledge) be
> addressed in a somewhat different pa
Sam Hocevar wrote:
>So, please let me know whether we'll have to fight, or if a few
> things can still go smoothly. This is certainly no longer something
> about which I can afford to wait 2 months between each answer from
> you.
Though I'm distant enough from the project to usually stay away
Hi James,
I hope that your current guilt-o-meter status will allow you to
sympathise with your fellow developers and their current feelings,
because I wouldn't enjoy an e-mail like this one either.
It has come to a point where quite a few people I like and respect
are considering leaving
25 matches
Mail list logo
