No reason to call anyone a troll, no reason to cause drama either. I
consider both sides to be wrong. However In all opensource projects there
needs to be a "core" membership in which decisions are made for the best of
the project, and just like any other project E has that. Now let's carry on
to h
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Cedric BAIL wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 3:25 AM, Michael Jennings wrote:
>> On Thursday, 01 April 2010, at 21:29:50 (-0400),
>> Jose Gonzalez wrote:
>>
>>> As you say.. But it's not about who to remove if you want to or
>>> not, (and of course they won't ca
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 3:25 AM, Michael Jennings wrote:
> On Thursday, 01 April 2010, at 21:29:50 (-0400),
> Jose Gonzalez wrote:
>
>> As you say.. But it's not about who to remove if you want to or
>> not, (and of course they won't care), it's about saying clearly that
>> it's you not some amb
Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:29:50 -0400 Jose Gonzalez said:
>
>
No 'trolls' here man. People really should know *clearly*
who the gate-keepers are, who controls what, what the
project's aims and goals are, etc.
>>> du
On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:29:50 -0400 Jose Gonzalez said:
>
> >> No 'trolls' here man. People really should know *clearly*
> >> who the gate-keepers are, who controls what, what the
> >> project's aims and goals are, etc.
> >>
> >
> > dude. by now, having founded and run this project for ove
On Thursday, 01 April 2010, at 21:29:50 (-0400),
Jose Gonzalez wrote:
>As you say.. But it's not about who to remove if you want to or
> not, (and of course they won't care), it's about saying clearly that
> it's you not some ambiguous "we".
You can count me in that "we" as well. I fully sup
>> No 'trolls' here man. People really should know *clearly*
>> who the gate-keepers are, who controls what, what the
>> project's aims and goals are, etc.
>>
>
> dude. by now, having founded and run this project for over 13 years... i think
> i have the right to not have to go explain myse
On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 20:57:39 -0400 Jose Gonzalez said:
>Carsten wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 16:56:44 -0400 Jose Gonzalez said:
> >
> > don't feed the troll.
> >
> >
>
> No 'trolls' here man. People really should know *clearly*
> who the gate-keepers are, who controls what, what t
On 2 April 2010 08:57, Jose Gonzalez wrote:
> Carsten wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 16:56:44 -0400 Jose Gonzalez said:
>>
>> don't feed the troll.
>>
>>
>
> No 'trolls' here man. People really should know *clearly*
> who the gate-keepers are, who controls what, what the
> project's aims and
Carsten wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 16:56:44 -0400 Jose Gonzalez said:
>
> don't feed the troll.
>
>
No 'trolls' here man. People really should know *clearly*
who the gate-keepers are, who controls what, what the
project's aims and goals are, etc.
Of course most of the people in
Bring the axe down I say. Im certain all those people would put the
security of the project over their token SVN access. On that topic, I
hope everyone has changed their passwords lately :) A good password is
one that keeps changing.
Toma.
On 2 April 2010 06:37, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Th
On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 16:56:44 -0400 Jose Gonzalez said:
don't feed the troll.
>Carsten wrote:
>
> > i recently found quite a number of accounts we have for svn commit access
> > that are simply 100% inactive (never used once for anything) or have been
> > inactive for what i consider "a whil
Carsten wrote:
> i recently found quite a number of accounts we have for svn commit access that
> are simply 100% inactive (never used once for anything) or have been inactive
> for what i consider "a while" with no good reason for that. here's the list.
> if
> you are on it expect your accoun
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 23:48:36 -0400 Christopher Michael
wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 11:37 PM, David Seikel wrote:
> > Personally, I've been way to busy with other stuff to do much in the
> > way of open source coding. I started working on my own linux last
> > month,
> Sounds interestingany url ?
On 03/31/2010 11:37 PM, David Seikel wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:41:00 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
> wrote:
>
>> i recently found quite a number of accounts we have for svn commit
>> access that are simply 100% inactive (never used once for anything)
>> or have been inactive for wha
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:41:00 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
wrote:
> i recently found quite a number of accounts we have for svn commit
> access that are simply 100% inactive (never used once for anything)
> or have been inactive for what i consider "a while" with no good
> reason for that
i recently found quite a number of accounts we have for svn commit access that
are simply 100% inactive (never used once for anything) or have been inactive
for what i consider "a while" with no good reason for that. here's the list. if
you are on it expect your account to be removed some-time soon
17 matches
Mail list logo
