Re: [gentoo-dev] Making the developer community more open

2006-03-20 Thread Bret Towe
On 3/20/06, Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "more open"? I can't think of a decent way to phrase the subject line > which might make it sound it was coming from a native English > speaker..ahem..anyway: > > I read a complimentary comment from a Gentoo user recently (can't > remember exact

Re: [gentoo-dev] mac/xmms-mac licence issue

2005-12-24 Thread Bret Towe
On 12/24/05, Daniel Ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2005-12-24 at 19:35 -0800, Bret Towe wrote: > > On 12/24/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 19:17:05 -0800 Bret Towe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > &g

Re: [gentoo-dev] mac/xmms-mac licence issue

2005-12-24 Thread Bret Towe
On 12/24/05, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 07:22:50PM -0800, Bret Towe wrote: > > > > i can understand putting proper warning in the ebuild if the dev > > > > thinks that its worth the user really noting the issues surround

Re: [gentoo-dev] mac/xmms-mac licence issue

2005-12-24 Thread Bret Towe
On 12/24/05, Daniel Ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2005-12-24 at 19:17 -0800, Bret Towe wrote: > > On 12/24/05, Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This isn't politics, but copyright infringement on top of a ridiculous > > > l

Re: [gentoo-dev] mac/xmms-mac licence issue

2005-12-24 Thread Bret Towe
On 12/24/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 19:17:05 -0800 Bret Towe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | On 12/24/05, Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | > This isn't politics, but copyright infringement on top of a > |

Re: [gentoo-dev] mac/xmms-mac licence issue

2005-12-24 Thread Bret Towe
On 12/24/05, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > License in question... > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=35862&action=view > > On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 06:11:53PM -0800, Bret Towe wrote: > > earily today i updated the ebuilds for mac and xmms-ma

Re: [gentoo-dev] mac/xmms-mac licence issue

2005-12-24 Thread Bret Towe
On 12/24/05, Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This isn't politics, but copyright infringement on top of a ridiculous license > (when you want to see it as one) we had a short discussion¹ about several > months ago. im sorry i fail to see how copyright infringement or a ridiculous licenc

[gentoo-dev] mac/xmms-mac licence issue

2005-12-24 Thread Bret Towe
earily today i updated the ebuilds for mac and xmms-mac, for those that dont know their applications for monkey's audio (.ape files), and got them submited to bug 94477[1] which was closed due to the way the licence was done my issue is i think the ebuilds should be commited to portage as i dont s

Re: [gentoo-dev] Viability of other SCM/version control systems for big repo's

2005-12-21 Thread Bret Towe
On 12/21/05, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > I know some of you have done research on how gentoo-x86 converts over to > > other systems besides CVS such as SVN, arch, etc. But I can't find the > > info anywhere in my archives. > > > > Could whoever's got it,

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc & binutils -aware hackers wanted for questions ;)

2005-11-28 Thread Bret Towe
On 11/28/05, Spider (D.m.D. Lj.) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:56 -0800, Bret Towe wrote: > > > > > > > So, now I'm just asking for comments and/or discussion here.. would it > > > be worth the time spent on this? > > &g

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc & binutils -aware hackers wanted for questions ;)

2005-11-28 Thread Bret Towe
On 11/28/05, Spider (D.m.D. Lj.) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > I've been looking some at Michael Meeks -Bdirect patches, and the > possible performance boost they could give. > > The good parts here is that it seems to be far less intrusive for the > running system than prelink is, on the