On 2007.07.13 18:12, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 08:34 +0200, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> > Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > We're voting on this next council meeting so if you have input,
> now
> > > would be the time.
> >
> > Really, I don't like the idea...the li
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:11:19 Duncan wrote:
> Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>
> excerpted below, on Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:01:53 -0600:
> > Why don't we create the gentoo-project mailing
> > list, and, you know, actually wait a bit to see how that actually goes.
> > Then we
"Thomas Tuttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below,
on Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:41:51 -0400:
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 23:54:44 -0400, "Daniel Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>> I do like the "gentoo-politics" idea that came up a few weeks ago,
>> which was to move politics o
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 12:22:09AM +0200, Torsten Veller wrote:
> What will you do when users start sending mail from dev addresses?
Ban the sender's address :-]
cheers,
Wernfried
--
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne (at) gentoo.org
Gentoo Forums - http://forums.gentoo.org
forum-mods (at) ge
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:02:07 +0100
> Peter Weller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> The moderators should get the final word, end of.
>
> That would only work if Gentoo could find decent moderator
Sorry I know I said "ignore thread" but really: just cos the forum mods
banned you it
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> Just because developers develop because they want to doesn't mean
>> they dont want to be part of a community, if that wasn't the case
>> then none of the current developers would have originally been part
>> of the userbase to begin with.
>
> What relevance does this ha
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 23:30 +0100, George Prowse wrote:
>> This is going to crash and burn but wouldn't it be an ideal job
>> description for the proctors? Instead of telling people off they could
>> just stop people posting. That way you dont even get to know that they
>
Torsten Veller wrote:
* Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where only
devs can post, but any dev could moderate a non-dev post.
What will you do when users start sending mail from dev addresses?
There's nothing to prevent that n
* Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where only
> devs can post, but any dev could moderate a non-dev post.
What will you do when users start sending mail from dev addresses?
Thanks,
Torsten
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 13:34 +0100, Steve Long wrote:
> Are you really claiming that Gentoo could possibly function as an
> organisation without the users?
Who ever said that?
Please don't read your own whatever into what is being said. I know I,
for one, don't really care what your opinion is on
Mike Doty wrote:
All-
We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where only
devs can post, but any dev could moderate a non-dev post. devs who moderate in
bad posts will be subject to moderation themselves. in addition the
gentoo-project list will be created to take ov
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:49:23 +0200, "Jakub Moc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> __ __ _
> |__ / _ \| \/ |/ ___| |
> / / | | | |\/| | | _| |
> / /| |_| | | | | |_| |_|
> /\___/|_| |_|\(_)
>
> Anyone tell me how can I get rid of this junk in my mailbox? Where's the
> d
__ __ _
|__ / _ \| \/ |/ ___| |
/ / | | | |\/| | | _| |
/ /| |_| | | | | |_| |_|
/\___/|_| |_|\(_)
Anyone tell me how can I get rid of this junk in my mailbox? Where's the
damned -announce list? Please, stop feeding this kind of debates down
everyone's throat.
:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:34:31 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It also happens that bugs are reported, and patches provided, by
> users. Not to mention documentation written, support provided on irc
> and in forums, which are the envy of every OS out there. Oh and the
> small matter of
Hello Steve!
On Monday, 16. July 2007 18:17:00 Steve Long wrote:
> Sure, but since you're only doing exactly what you want, when you want,
> why do you guys keep bleating about how much work you have, and what
> extravagant demands us lusers make on you?
Now, now. You're a nice guy on IRC so what
Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> You misunderstand. I'm not saying that all non-devs can get bent and their
> opinions be damned. I'm just saying that at the core, Gentoo is still the
> same as it was "back in the day". Gentoo isn't a commercial distribution,
> and nobody pays us, so we can do anything we w
Steve Long wrote:
> Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>
>
>> Matthias Langer wrote:
>>
>>> no offense, but this is one of the worst proposals i've ever read on
>>> this list; why? because, one of gentoo's major problems is that it is
>>> becoming more and more a toy exclusively for its own developers.
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Matthias Langer wrote:
>> no offense, but this is one of the worst proposals i've ever read on
>> this list; why? because, one of gentoo's major problems is that it is
>> becoming more and more a toy exclusively for its own developers.
>
> Gentoo's always been exclusively
Kumba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Sun, 15 Jul 2007 19:13:31 -0400:
> @Council
> As for the rest of thisthread..., mayhaps it would be wise for
> Council and Infra to postpone the moderation idea for a few months? (let
> 2007-2008 council handle the matter
Duncan wrote:
I like the "gentoo-project" (yes, that's better than politics) idea as
well, and believe it /could/ solve the problem here, given a couple
conditions are met.
One, -project is not to be required reading for devs as -dev is. Devs
(and others) can ignore it if they wish.
Two,
Christina Fullam wrote:
> I suppose the problem is high-volume and excessive flaming/trolling/OT.
> The proposed solution asks that every developer take an active role,
> yes, so that could easily equal more work - but I have little doubts
> that there are developers that will take an interest in
Will Briggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sun, 15 Jul
2007 17:54:10 +1000:
> At the moment gentoo-dev is a "one big noisy room" forum. This is seen
> as a "problem"
>
> Propose solutions have included:
>
> 1) The "Let's divide up the room" solution - (and so
Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Sat, 14 Jul 2007 23:54:44 -0400:
> I do like the "gentoo-politics" idea that came up a few weeks ago, which
> was to move politics off gentoo-dev and to another list, but I'd view it
> from another perspective (and avo
Christina Fullam wrote:
> I suppose the problem is high-volume and excessive flaming/trolling/OT.
> The proposed solution asks that every developer take an active role,
> yes, so that could easily equal more work - but I have little doubts
> that there are developers that will take an interest in
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 10:16:36 -0600
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christina Fullam wrote:
> > I think everyone is overlooking the part included previously:
> > "An additional method discussed was to have all non-dev emails on a
> > timeout, pick a number of hours, and then the email if not
On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 10:25 -0700, Josh Saddler wrote:
> William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > -core Internal Private List, Public R/O after period of time
> > -core Internal Private List, Public R/O after period of time
>
> No. -core should not ever be public. It's not for
William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> -core Internal Private List, Public R/O after period of time
> -core Internal Private List, Public R/O after period of time
No. -core should not ever be public. It's not for development anyway.
-core contains things like personal issues the developer
On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 10:16 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > so all
> you've done is made posts from non-dev accounts time delayed. Why?
Time delayed -dev doesn't make sense for anyone. IMHO this makes sense.
-core Internal Private List, Public R/O after period of time
-devInter
Christina Fullam wrote:
> I think everyone is overlooking the part included previously:
> "An additional method discussed was to have all non-dev emails on a
> timeout, pick a number of hours, and then the email if not moderated
> would be released. (non-dev sends his email, time period expires and
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 08:39 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> I just read an article about this [1]. To summarize, in a volunteer
>> community, there needs to be more people enforcing the rules than
>> people breaking them. A small group of proctors doesn't work -- we need
Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 02:17 +0200, Robert Buchholz wrote:
>
>> I have to second the voices that a lot of user mails are productive.
>> I did
>> not do any stats, but I feel that most mails to -dev are currently by
>> Gentoo
>> devs anyway, so it will not seriously reduce the amo
As another invisible AT, theres a couple of points I want to make about
blanket blacklisting:
1. gentoo-dev has an outside image. The current, anyone-can-post,
projects the image that the developers are happy to receive outside
opinions that may be different to 'how things are done'. This is,
Vieri Di Paola schrieb:
> I already contacted jokey (Markus) several months ago
> via e-mail and we agreed that he would have setup
> "proxy maintenance" for the shorewall ebuilds so that
> I could contribute patches and learn from his
> suggestions. We never got to do anything because we
> simply
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:12:27 -0700
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am so waiting for my term to end on the Council so I can procmail
> this list to /dev/null and never have to deal with this sort of crap
> again. Sure, I'll miss some important information, but the signal to
> noise
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 08:34 +0200, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > We're voting on this next council meeting so if you have input, now
> > would be the time.
>
> Really, I don't like the idea...the list has been calm for some time
> now, the discussions were le
Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> We're voting on this next council meeting so if you have input, now
> would be the time.
Really, I don't like the idea...the list has been calm for some time
now, the discussions were lengthy sometimes but not aggressive.
V-Li
--
http://www.gentoo.org/
http://
Daniel Ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 12
Jul 2007 18:41:33 -0700:
> 1). Create 1 (ONE) new list, which, for the purposes of this discussion
> I will call it gentoo-dev-info (the name matters not). The requirement
> for subscription for all devs would
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:01:53 -0600:
> Why don't we create the gentoo-project mailing
> list, and, you know, actually wait a bit to see how that actually goes.
> Then we can talk about how best to handle -dev. One shit at
Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> I as a developer find it very difficult to cut though what I consider
> noise to find the bits that I consider important to being able to
> continue being an effective developer on a list that I am *required* to
> be subscribed to. We have considered the likes of a moderated
Mike Doty wrote:
> All-
>
> We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where only
> devs can post, but any dev could moderate a non-dev post. devs who moderate
> in
> bad posts will be subject to moderation themselves. in addition the
> gentoo-project list will be crea
Markus Ullmann wrote:
> Hey ;)
>
> As an extension of it. What about this:
>
> _All_ posts from -dev go in CC to -project. Even if the posts are
> moderated, they always appear there. That way you can have a (moderated)
> subset as -dev and people who want to get their words and fights out,
> ca
On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 00:55 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> Mike Doty wrote:
> > We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where
> > only devs can post,
>
> Restricting freedom to post is like setting up surveilance and censorship
> against terrorism.
No, it is nothing
Mike Doty wrote:
> We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where
> only devs can post,
Restricting freedom to post is like setting up surveilance and censorship
against terrorism.
I hate it when the "rulers" think they can impose such decisions upon the
people and do n
Hey ;)
As an extension of it. What about this:
_All_ posts from -dev go in CC to -project. Even if the posts are
moderated, they always appear there. That way you can have a (moderated)
subset as -dev and people who want to get their words and fights out,
can do that on -project?
Greetz
-Jokey
Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Let's go for censorship! Let's vote for gagging those users who don't
> have any idea of development and those ex-devs who think they still have
> anything to say.
Yawn...
>
> And to give that comment a technical side:
> - Do you think that any dev will regularly check fo
Mike Doty schrieb:
> All-
>
> We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where only
> devs can post, but any dev could moderate a non-dev post. devs who moderate
> in
> bad posts will be subject to moderation themselves. in addition the
> gentoo-project list will be cr
46 matches
Mail list logo
