On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net
wrote:
On 4/9/2012 11:04 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 09 April 2012, Rainer Jung wrote:
Do you disagree with the procedure and/or my attempt to
On 08.04.2012 15:28, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Perhaps it is just my nature to disagree with everybody when there is
some contentious discussion. Or just possibly it is my nature to try
to pull apart what was discussed (or yelled), throw away the most
extreme aspects, and see if there is anything to
Rainer Jung wrote:
On 08.04.2012 15:28, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Perhaps it is just my nature to disagree with everybody when there is
some contentious discussion. Or just possibly it is my nature to try
to pull apart what was discussed (or yelled), throw away the most
extreme aspects, and see
On Monday 09 April 2012, Rainer Jung wrote:
Do you disagree with the procedure and/or my attempt to describe
the normal way this is handled?
No, I agree and I think it is more useful to include the CHANGES
entry in the backport commit than to split it in a second commit.
At least that's
On 4/9/2012 11:04 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 09 April 2012, Rainer Jung wrote:
Do you disagree with the procedure and/or my attempt to describe
the normal way this is handled?
No, I agree and I think it is more useful to include the CHANGES
entry in the backport commit than to
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 4/9/2012 11:04 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 09 April 2012, Rainer Jung wrote:
Do you disagree with the procedure and/or my attempt to describe
the normal way this is handled?
No, I agree and I think it
Perhaps it is just my nature to disagree with everybody when there is
some contentious discussion. Or just possibly it is my nature to try
to pull apart what was discussed (or yelled), throw away the most
extreme aspects, and see if there is anything to agree on. (Even in
the absence of past
