Who cares about views? It is our distro and we just like to make it
better. Right?
There is a plethora of potential Gentoo developers out there and this
sort of press does nothing for getting them any closer to joining the
effort.
Secondly, regarding the DW article, surely if it was as
From your draft:
(note: most parts shamelessly stolen from Christel)
In that case, showing only what differs from Christel's proposal would
have been a better way to present yours.
Denis.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:06:28 +0100
Alexandre Buisse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] But then, why do we need a Code of Conduct at all? There
is nothing in it that people don't already know and if they choose to
still commit the offense, it's either that they don't think it's one
or that they
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 23:40:54 +0100
Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ps. If someone wanted to start a gentoo-politics, by all means, go
ahead, just don't expect anyone to read it.
That's not such a bad idea, really. I don't mean creating -politics as
such, but the idea of separating out
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 08:51:42AM +0100, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
From your draft:
(note: most parts shamelessly stolen from Christel)
In that case, showing only what differs from Christel's proposal would
have been a better way to present yours.
Sorry if that was unclear, that note didn't
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 09:58:50PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
* The wrong idea of what the user base is, and what the target user
base is. Gentoo's direction is too heavily influenced by a small
number of extremely noisy ricer forum users, many of whom don't
even run Gentoo.
Wernfried Haas napsal(a):
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 09:58:50PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Sunrise is the canonical example. Also consider the way the forums are
being run (like it or not, the forums are taken by many to be
representative of Gentoo's user base)...
Drop your theories about
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 06:15:27PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
No one's been complaining about the user forums, apart from ciaran
afaict
Oh, I assure you I'm not the only person to have serious issues with
the forums. A number of Gentoo developers and former Gentoo developers
have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alexandre Buisse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] But then, why do we need a Code of Conduct at all?
I don't see as we need a CoC at all. The Etiquette policy should
suffice. We're all adults here and we don't need another
babysitter^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
This is a great link for the leaders, developers and just about anyone
else involved in our community. While this is solely my opinion I do
humbly ask anyone with a spare few minutes to step back and take a look.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4216011961522818645q=poisonous+people
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
C. Bergström wrote:
This is a great link for the leaders, developers and just about anyone
else involved in our community. While this is solely my opinion I do
humbly ask anyone with a spare few minutes to step back and take a look.
Le Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:06:28 +0100,
Alexandre Buisse [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
Hi all,
I've been voicing my concern repeatedly on irc, and I believe that it
would probably be more effective here.
I believe that the solution of adopting a Code of Conduct, especially in
this rushed way,
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 23:33:54 -0400 Dan Meltzer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paludis had nothing to do with that. It was a Portage change that
required the update.
hansmi's log was from 1-06-2007. The change in portage was added
1-23-07. This was before the discussion and portage fix, when
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:49:39 +0100 Wernfried Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 09:58:50PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
* The wrong idea of what the user base is, and what the target
user base is. Gentoo's direction is too heavily influenced by a
small number of
George Prowse wrote:
Stephen Bennett wrote:
I'd rather make it known that that sort of backhanded tactics to get rid
of someone you don't like won't work whoever uses them.
You would certainly make that point. then let the other employee leave
and let the employee in question know that
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Incidentally, I'm unsure as to how your analogy applies here. You keep
mentioning 'best employee'. I'm not sure how that fits in.
No, twice he said one of the best employees. Honestly Ciarian, I'd think
you of all people would not want to mis-quote someone.
--
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 00:35 +, George Prowse wrote:
Ferris McCormick wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:30:32 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
snip
Personally I understand why
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steve Long wrote:
George Prowse wrote:
Stephen Bennett wrote:
I'd rather make it known that that sort of backhanded tactics to get rid
of someone you don't like won't work whoever uses them.
You would certainly make that point. then let the
On 3/15/07, Wernfried Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that sums the most important differences up, if you need more
information, please read post proposals. ;-)
It's much clearer like this, now. Thank you.
Denis.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
The KDE team is still grossly understaffed. Most of the long term developers
on the
team are either gone or inactive, and the ones still working on it really need
help.
Bugs are piling up, patches are waiting, and package versions need bumped. I
simply don't have the time to keep up with it
Volunteers, please join #gentoo-kde at irc.freenode.net! We'll be expecting you.
On 3/15/07, Caleb Tennis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The KDE team is still grossly understaffed. Most of the long term developers
on the
team are either gone or inactive, and the ones still working on it really need
* The repeated abuse of silly phrases like Gentoo is about choice,
Gentoo is about the community and Gentoo should be about fun to
attempt to rationalise insane policy decisions. Choice, community and
fun are all very well, but without a quality distribution they're
worthless. The primary goal
Caleb Cushing wrote:
What on earth is going to be a major visible improvement to a
command
line based package manager that any average Gentoo user is going to
realise? The average user probably only uses a few commands: emerge
-u/p/a/v/--sync/package/world/system and then
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:30:11 + George Prowse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I'd rather make it known that that sort of backhanded tactics to
get rid of someone you don't like won't work whoever uses them.
You would certainly make that point. then let the other
And if said employee had already pulled several I'm resigning
publicity stunts in the past? And if said employee had seen other
people trying the same thing unsuccessfully?
Then you deal with them at such a time as they appear, you do not let 2
employees go when everyone's integrity could
Caleb Cushing wrote:
I have no idea if it's possible but if a topic is deemed to be off
topic
then can any further replies with that subject be forwarded
automatically to another address like gentoo-dev-offtopic so they dont
go to gentoo-dev?
I believe you can change the
Warwick Bruce Chapman wrote:
There is a plethora of potential Gentoo developers out there and this
sort of press does nothing for getting them any closer to joining the
effort.
I consider myself a potential Gentoo developer, although as I stated
in my first post I simply don't have the time.
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:19:52 + George Prowse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What on earth is going to be a major visible improvement to a
command line based package manager that any average Gentoo user is
going to realise? The average user probably only uses a few
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 23:40:54 +0100
Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ps. If someone wanted to start a gentoo-politics, by all means, go
ahead, just don't expect anyone to read it.
That's not such a bad idea, really. I don't mean creating -politics as
such,
George Prowse wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:19:52 + George Prowse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What on earth is going to be a major visible improvement to a
command line based package manager that any average Gentoo user is
going to realise? The average user probably
Ferris McCormick wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 00:35 +, George Prowse wrote:
Ferris McCormick wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:30:32 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
snip
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steve Long wrote:
George Prowse wrote:
Stephen Bennett wrote:
I'd rather make it known that that sort of backhanded tactics to get rid
of someone you don't like won't work whoever uses them.
Stephen Becker wrote:
And if said employee had already pulled several I'm resigning
publicity stunts in the past? And if said employee had seen other
people trying the same thing unsuccessfully?
Then you deal with them at such a time as they appear, you do not
let 2
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:44:37 +
George Prowse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joe was leaving anyway. Ask Joe to leave soon which saves every
single problem. Joe just does what he was going to do, you get what
you want and the company keeps on running smoothly. The company then
has the choice of
I think this one is a lot better, thanks amne.
In terms of implementation, can't we just get some dev-moderators (cf
proctors) who moderate bugzilla and ml? If a user comes into those channels
they are subject to the same standards, with perhaps a little leeway since
they don't post from a
Stephen Becker wrote:
I would still have told Diego exactly how I felt about unreasonably
abusing an arch team member who was simply trying to do his job
What by abusing him in turn on bugzilla so it would stay part of the public
record? Good game representing gentoo there. And was Diego being
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 14:44 +, George Prowse wrote:
Ferris McCormick wrote:
As I recall, flameeyes made the statement to kloeri, and kloeri called
it blackmail. Whatever you call it, in business, issuing such an
ultimatum is one of the quickest ways to become unemployed.
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
Fortunately some people value integrity above what you call
man-management and people skills.
Yes in times gone by, they used to be called hermits. Can we stop the
nastiness please? You are clearly impugning a whole swathe of people's
integrity.
--
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
When these big debates arise, discussion could be shunted to the
separate list, requiring those who care enough to join the debate, to
join that list, which may help limit the number of people who get
involved. Perhaps gentoo-discuss.
Or maybe you guys could just use
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
Warwick Bruce Chapman wrote:
There is a plethora of potential Gentoo developers out there and this
sort of press does nothing for getting them any closer to joining the
effort.
Agreed by me at least.
In any event, the Distrowatch article did not change either my
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:11:49 + George Prowse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If you think that that's all a package manager should do, you have a
serious lack of imagination. Most users need or would heavily
benefit from far more. See http://ciaranm.org/show_post/95 for some
modest ideas that
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 01:36:19 +1100 Jonathan Adamczewski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(Also, mandate that there be a link to upstream changelogs (or a
summary thereof) in a packages changelog in portage. Help users make
informed decisions about upgrades. Some devs already do this e.g.
Ferris McCormick wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 14:44 +, George Prowse wrote:
Ferris McCormick wrote:
As I recall, flameeyes made the statement to kloeri, and kloeri called
it blackmail. Whatever you call it, in business, issuing such an
ultimatum is one of the
On 3/15/07, Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Becker wrote:
I would still have told Diego exactly how I felt about unreasonably
abusing an arch team member who was simply trying to do his job
What by abusing him in turn on bugzilla so it would stay part of the public
record? Good
Stephen Becker napsal(a):
First of all, get your facts straight. The bugzilla incident of which
you speak happened before all of this. Second of all, the language is
irrelevant. Point is, he was acting like an asshole to somebody , so
he got abused in return.
Yeah indeed, lets get the
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:11:49 + George Prowse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If you think that that's all a package manager should do, you have a
serious lack of imagination. Most users need or would heavily
benefit from far more. See http://ciaranm.org/show_post/95 for
George Prowse wrote:
Caleb Cushing wrote:
How about the speed of search's? the speed of resolving dependancy's?
how about the speed that it takes to calculate a dependancy listing
after you've already done it once? portage is SLOW.
So speed...
Re: speed of searches, try qsearch from
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:44:37 + George Prowse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Joe was leaving anyway. Ask Joe to leave soon which saves every
single problem. Joe just does what he was going to do, you get what
you want and the company keeps on running smoothly. The company
On 3/15/07, Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Becker napsal(a):
First of all, get your facts straight. The bugzilla incident of which
you speak happened before all of this. Second of all, the language is
irrelevant. Point is, he was acting like an asshole to somebody , so
he got
Warwick Bruce Chapman wrote:
I'm not sure that differs much from the meaning I interpreted from
Ciaran's point.
I read antarus' point as: without a happy dev community you won't achieve a
quality distro.
Ciaran seems to be saying you can, and *then* everyone will be happy. That
sounds like
Jakub Moc wrote:
Stephen Becker napsal(a):
First of all, get your facts straight. The bugzilla incident of which
you speak happened before all of this. Second of all, the language is
irrelevant. Point is, he was acting like an asshole to somebody , so
he got abused in return.
Yeah
Stephen Bennett wrote:
Perhaps not implausible in its strictest sense, as it could be done. It
would, however, be a monumentally stupid idea in the general case, if
said user happened to be a contributor upstream to widely-used
packages, or happened to discover an important security bug in
George Prowse wrote:
Caleb Cushing wrote:
I have no idea if it's possible but if a topic is deemed to be off
topic then can any further replies with that subject be forwarded
automatically to another address like gentoo-dev-offtopic so they
dont go to gentoo-dev?
I believe you can change the
OK, you three. Knock it off. Right now. This is exactly the sort of
utter nonsense that we've been talking about viz. what's going on on
this mailing list.
There is no excuse to be an asshole, Stephen, because in doing so (even
as a retaliation) renders your own point null and void. It's one
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 16:38 +, George Prowse wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:44:37 + George Prowse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You miss the point. This was not the first time a resignation stunt had
been pulled by that developer, and previously another
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:31:08 + George Prowse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I think you're massively underestimating the requirements of the
average user, what with the tree as complex as it is these days.
Most users now:
* Have to use external repositories
* Have to handle at least some
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:30:36 +0100 Jakob Buchgraber
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're avoiding my point. The improvements that are being made
are, by and large, insignificant. Portage doesn't need a few
little tweaks now and again. It has to start delivering a whole
load of major new
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Which, even if it were true, is besides the point if doing so prevents
any development from getting done. And just how much development gets
done on the forums?
No development gets done on here either. Discussion does. Development
happens when people aren't getting
On 15/03/07, Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No development gets done on here either. Discussion does. Development
happens when people aren't getting drawn into long flames about the distro
they use, which only clog up peoples' inboxes. Are you suggesting a dev
forum on forums.gentoo.org?
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:30:36 +0100 Jakob Buchgraber
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're avoiding my point. The improvements that are being made
are, by and large, insignificant. Portage doesn't need a few
little tweaks now and again. It has to start delivering a whole
load
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:30:01 + Steve Long
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Which, even if it were true, is besides the point if doing so
prevents any development from getting done. And just how much
development gets done on the forums?
No development gets done on here
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:33:12 -0300 Mauricio Lima Pilla
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 15 March 2007 14:15:05 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Which, even if it were true, is besides the point if doing so
prevents any development from getting done. And just how much
development gets done on the
On Thursday 15 March 2007 14:46:46 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Why are those responsible for the forums unwilling to accept any
feedback or criticism, instead attacking the attacker or accusing the
attacker of merely being one of my pawns? Or, when it happens on the
forums, making unspecific
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 18:40 +0100, Jakob Buchgraber wrote:
So why don't you start rewriting, refactoring and improving the portage
source? It definitely doesn't make sense to create a competing package
management system.
How is this useful, honestly? Ciaran's exercising his strengths:
C. Bergström wrote:
Since there's a select few people here who feel it's their duty to keep
posting non-technical discussion to this list.
1) Someone much more senior than me please step in and take a leader role.
2) Everyone wrapped up in please take a step back and see what's
actually
Alec Warner wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
* Portage.
Portage is being incrementally improved.
My understanding was that the portage team can't move forward with a new
version until EAPI0 is done?
I also think either you are ignoring the changes or you are just unaware
of things that the
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:40:05 +0100
Jakob Buchgraber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why don't you start rewriting, refactoring and improving the
portage source? It definitely doesn't make sense to create a
competing package management system.
I think you underestimate just how much rewriting and
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:42:17 + Steve Long
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alec Warner wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
* Portage.
Portage is being incrementally improved.
My understanding was that the portage team can't move forward with a
new version until EAPI0 is done?
Entirely untrue. Even
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:42:17 +
Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My understanding was that the portage team can't move forward with a
new version until EAPI0 is done?
They can't move forward with changes that break ebuild compatibility
until EAPI-0 is documented and EAPI-1 can start to
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:40:05 +0100 Jakob Buchgraber
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why don't you start rewriting, refactoring and improving the
portage source? It definitely doesn't make sense to create a
competing package management system.
Because it's far simpler to start from scratch.
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:40:05 +0100
Jakob Buchgraber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why don't you start rewriting, refactoring and improving the
portage source? It definitely doesn't make sense to create a
competing package management system.
Patches welcome, I think is the appropriate response
Hi List,
The following mail has been written on Tuesday before alot of the recent
discussions. It hasn't been changed except for three passages, which I left
out (marked with [...]) which had no actual content, and don't make sense
to be send to the list, but only to the actual addressee, who
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:40:05 +0100
Jakob Buchgraber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why don't you start rewriting, refactoring and improving the
portage source? It definitely doesn't make sense to create a
competing package management system.
Patches welcome, I
On Thursday 15 March 2007 10:15, Jeff Gardner wrote:
Alexandre Buisse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] But then, why do we need a Code of Conduct at all?
I don't see as we need a CoC at all. The Etiquette policy should
suffice. We're all adults here and we don't need another
Stephen Becker napsal(a):
On 3/15/07, Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah indeed, lets get the facts straight and let's see who did behave
like an asshole:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=110676action=view
Indeed both of us were assholes that day, I never denied that. The
Steve Long wrote:
C. Bergström wrote:
Since there's a select few people here who feel it's their duty to keep
posting non-technical discussion to this list.
1) Someone much more senior than me please step in and take a leader role.
2) Everyone wrapped up in please take a step back and see
Both of you please stop this thread right here. It's getting nobody
anywhere.
Thanks,
seemant
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On 3/15/07, Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 15 March 2007 10:15, Jeff Gardner wrote:
Alexandre Buisse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] But then, why do we need a Code of Conduct at all?
I don't see as we need a CoC at all. The Etiquette policy should
suffice.
Hi,
www-apps/dokuwiki is without an ebuild maintainer and has an open
security bug #163781 that corresponds to several vulnerabilities
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163781
CVE-2006-6965
CVE-2006-5099
CVE-2006-5098
CVE-2006-4679
CVE-2006-4675
CVE-2006-4674
CVE-2006-2945
CVE-2006-2878
070315 Caleb Tennis wrote:
The KDE team is still grossly understaffed.
Bugs are piling up, patches are waiting and package versions need bumped.
I simply don't have the time to keep up with it anymore.
I've been doing this for over 4 years now
and my interests have shifted to other things.
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:46:30 +0100
Raphael Marichez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone willing to take care of this package in the future, please update
metadata.xml and CC yourself on the bug.
Non-vulnerable version is in the tree, and I have added myself to metadata.xml
with description Backup
hours.
the full log can be found at the normal location:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20070315.txt
--
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux Developer Council Member
E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
pgpb3TjNZxZbC.pgp
Stephen Bennett wrote:
My understanding was that the portage team can't move forward with a
new version until EAPI0 is done?
They can't move forward with changes that break ebuild compatibility
until EAPI-0 is documented and EAPI-1 can start to be defined. That's
not to say that user-side
Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
Volunteers, please join #gentoo-kde at irc.freenode.net! We'll be
expecting you.
from a user point of view: why don't you just close a bug, if
* a user is careless enough to forget about emerge --info (don't ask for more
info- just close it)
* there is a chance that
Jakob Buchgraber wrote:
So I just think something has to be changed e.g. making paludis an
official gentoo project and mentioning it in the docs, but keep portage
as the default pm.
If portage can't get improved, then people have to get informed that
there is a better alternative, because I
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:36:49 + Steve Long
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Bennett wrote:
My understanding was that the portage team can't move forward with
a new version until EAPI0 is done?
They can't move forward with changes that break ebuild compatibility
until EAPI-0 is
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
And that's precisely because a whole generation of RHCEs knows *exactly*
where everything is on a Red Hat or Fedora system, and Gentoo puts
everything somewhere else. :) If I were an RHCE, I'd have just as much
trouble customizing and tweaking a Gentoo (or
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
I joined this list mostly to talk about the proposed code of conduct.
This oughta stir the pot a little, but way back when I was just a wee lil o'
geek in a Star Wars club, we had a developed Code of Conduct. Now for the most
part, it worked and worked well.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
WARN: unpack
Sorry, but mozilla-sunbird-bin does not support the en_GB LINGUA
Why is this a warning? (and it's a warning in plenty of ebuilds). I have
LINGUAS defined in /etc/make.conf - warning about an unsupported LINGUA
is like warning about an unsupported USE
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:04:34 +1100
Jonathan Adamczewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is this a warning? (and it's a warning in plenty of ebuilds). I
have LINGUAS defined in /etc/make.conf - warning about an unsupported
LINGUA is like warning about an unsupported USE flag.
Exactly.
I would
On Friday 16 March 2007 02:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:40:05 +0100 Jakob Buchgraber
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why don't you start rewriting, refactoring and improving the
portage source? It definitely doesn't make sense to create a
competing package management
Rearranging and snipping a bit to clarify my points.
On Friday 16 March 2007 09:17, Daniel Drake wrote:
Jason Stubbs wrote:
2) Each technical area usually has a clear authority - ie. a spokesman
whom is listened to and usually has one's posts challenged with clear
respect.
1) There is a
Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on
Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:02:15 -0700:
* The motion was called for accepted the CoC with the above
modifications, as well as revisiting it next council meeting,
and reviewing the actions of proctors during every
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 04:35:00AM +, Duncan wrote:
* If you perceive a breach of the Code of Conduct guidelines, let the
proctors know. How? The council's email address is given for appeals,
but no general proctor address is listed. (At least none that I saw, even
after searching, so
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Grant Goodyear wrote:
Underlying the draft code of conduct is an assumption that aggressive
and less-than-nice behavior on gentoo-dev is seriously harming Gentoo.
On the other hand, LKML is famous for its flamewars, and nobody claims
that Linux is in serious trouble.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alec Warner wrote:
My only concern is about consistency. IE the portage backend (if I
recall correctly) should return all matching nodes; emerge would then
take that list and find the first one that matches in the vdb. However
it becomes a bit
96 matches
Mail list logo
