This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
irc.freenode.net) !
If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote
on, let us know! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gen
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> irc.freenode.net) !
Informal request, but it would be useful to get an idea of the
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Brian Harring wrote:
>
> At the very least I'm after having the non-pms repos marked in some
> fashion so that alt implementations don't have to assume the portage
> standard (rather then the *agreed to* pms standard) to avoid
> exploding, but that's a rather short
On 23:26 Sun 22 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> irc.freenode.net) !
>
> If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote
> o
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 23:26 Sun 22 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
>> Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
>> irc.freenode.net) !
>>
>> If you have something you'd wish for us to cha
Le mardi 24 février 2009 à 09:47 -0800, Brian Harring a écrit :
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> > Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> > irc.freenode
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 01:42:38PM +0100, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> Le mardi 24 février 2009 à 09:47 -0800, Brian Harring a écrit :
> > On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > > This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> > > Thursdays
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> irc.freenode.net) !
>
> If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vot
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Some discussion on list. Luca, can you sum up the state of things?
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_81c676b7338c7c0dd10ce13b0e4684a2.xml
and
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_22ecf185ab30a470fa7c26c06633d495.xml
Pretty much give you a summary, nothing
On 23:12 Tue 24 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Here's the preliminary agenda. I'm running a bit behind on -dev, so
> it's a little out of date re GLEPs 54/55. People including lu_zero,
> cardoe, dev-zero, and tanderson should fill us in on things below that
> they've taken responsibility for
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:19:20 -0800
> > GLEP 54: handling code from SCMs better
> > ---
> >
> > Some discussion on list. Luca, can you sum up the state of things?
>
> Still waiting on a summary ... perhaps if Luca's too busy, our
> wonderful new secretary could
On 11:19 Thu 26 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 23:12 Tue 24 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > GLEP 54: handling code from SCMs better
> > ---
> >
> > Some discussion on list. Luca, can you sum up the state of things?
>
> Still waiting on a summary
So
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Anyone but Luca please. Luca's been busy selectively ignoring problems
with his proposal, refusing to answer objections to it and claiming it
solves problems that it doesn't.
My last two summaries got no replies from you so I guessed you were fine
with them.
lu
--
Lu
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:19:20AM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 23:12 Tue 24 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > Here's the preliminary agenda. I'm running a bit behind on -dev, so
> > it's a little out of date re GLEPs 54/55. People including lu_zero,
> > cardoe, dev-zero, and tanderson s
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:34:07 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Anyone but Luca please. Luca's been busy selectively ignoring
> > problems with his proposal, refusing to answer objections to it and
> > claiming it solves problems that it doesn't.
>
> My last two summaries got
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:34:07 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
I'm still waiting for you to answer this:
Be specific. Explain how this works when, say, 0.34.4 is current, you
have a 0.34.5_live and 0.34.5 comes out.
being live working as substitute for 0.34.5_preN (_live) comp
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:40:26 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
> >> Be specific. Explain how this works when, say, 0.34.4 is current,
> >> you have a 0.34.5_live and 0.34.5 comes out.
>
> being live working as substitute for 0.34.5_preN (_live) component
> the appearance of 0.34.5 will be higher than tho
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:40:26 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
Be specific. Explain how this works when, say, 0.34.4 is current,
you have a 0.34.5_live and 0.34.5 comes out.
being live working as substitute for 0.34.5_preN (_live) component
the appearance of 0.34.5 will be highe
18 matches
Mail list logo
