Valentin Villenave writes:
> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 4:48 AM, Joe Neeman wrote:
>> If the archives were public, it might deter people from speaking frankly.
>
> I understand; however having public archives is also something
> important for the project's history. The best compromise I could come
>
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 4:48 AM, Joe Neeman wrote:
> If the archives were public, it might deter people from speaking frankly.
I understand; however having public archives is also something
important for the project's history. The best compromise I could come
up with would be to make discussions p
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Valentin Villenave
wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Joe Neeman wrote:
> > What sort of signs would you find reassuring?
>
> Greetings Joe,
> Well, your answer is one, for starters :)
>
> What I meant by "reassuring signs" is pretty much any reactions from
>
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Joe Neeman wrote:
> What sort of signs would you find reassuring?
Greetings Joe,
Well, your answer is one, for starters :)
What I meant by "reassuring signs" is pretty much any reactions from
the development team acknowledging that there might be an issue (or
some
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Valentin Villenave
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:29 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> > David seemingly is quite incapable of bringing his meaning across, so
> > instead of substituting your own, just quote him.
>
> Indeed. As you may have guessed, I added your name
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:29 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> David seemingly is quite incapable of bringing his meaning across, so
> instead of substituting your own, just quote him.
Indeed. As you may have guessed, I added your name to that sentence as
an afterthought, only to make it clear that I di
Valentin Villenave writes:
> situation (and again: like David, I am not referring to the division
> between people who are subscribed to -hackers and other people, but
> between those who "know" about it and those who do not).
David seemingly is quite incapable of bringing his meaning across, so
On 11/5/10 11:40 AM, "Valentin Villenave" wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
>> 2) Any description of the history may be irrelevant to the future
>
> Is it for us to decide?
>
Nope. And it's impossible for anybody to decide until it becomes an active
part of th
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> I'm certain that the reason I'm not on the list is because the list is in
> total disarray.
It seems that we all agree on that.
> I see several challenges associated with producing a more informative patch
> at this time:
> 1) -hackers is mo
On 11/5/10 9:37 AM, "Valentin Villenave" wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> As far as I know, I'm not a member of -hackers. I get a not-found error
>> whenever I click on any of the links.
>>
>> I don't have any emails from -hackers in my inbox or saved mails.
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> As far as I know, I'm not a member of -hackers. I get a not-found error
> whenever I click on any of the links.
>
> I don't have any emails from -hackers in my inbox or saved mails. I don't
> have -hackers in my Contacts list. So I'm not pa
On 11/5/10 8:15 AM, "Valentin Villenave" wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> Great! Let's move on, OK? If Valentin wants to patch the documentation,
>> then he can propose a patch. The same applies to anyone else who wants to
>> propose a patch.
> I have no doubt
Carl Sorensen writes:
> On 11/5/10 7:26 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>
>>
>> I repeat: do you (not necessarily "David", but "anybody") agree
>> that an OSS project can, in theory, have some kind of private
>> mailing list?
>
> I believe that private mailing lists for an OSS project are useful a
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> Great! Let's move on, OK? If Valentin wants to patch the documentation,
> then he can propose a patch. The same applies to anyone else who wants to
> propose a patch.
*I* certainly am in no place to propose a patch, since I don't know
*any
On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 07:36:42AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> I don't think it's worth delaying 2.14 in order to debate either of these
> questions. Can't we just note that the debate exists, perhaps add it to our
> list of GLISS topics, and move on to getting 2.14 out?
It's not a GLISS (synta
On 11/5/10 7:49 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 07:36:42AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> I don't think it's worth delaying 2.14 in order to debate either of these
>> questions. Can't we just note that the debate exists, perhaps add it to our
>> list of GLISS topics, and m
On 11/5/10 7:26 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>
> I repeat: do you (not necessarily "David", but "anybody") agree
> that an OSS project can, in theory, have some kind of private
> mailing list?
I believe that private mailing lists for an OSS project are useful and that
LilyPond should have them.
On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 01:46:07PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > -- from my comment 3
> > Before discussing anything specific, I want to settle the abstract
> > question "should an OSS project have any kind of private mailing
> > list?". You have two options:
>
Graham Percival writes:
> -- from my comment 3
> Before discussing anything specific, I want to settle the abstract
> question "should an OSS project have any kind of private mailing
> list?". You have two options:
>
> 1) Give an argument why they should not. In particular, explain
> why Ku
On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 10:03:02AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> What leaves sort of a bad aftertaste here, I think, is that there is a
> semi-official "inner circle"
Please read my email from two months ago
http://www.mail-archive.com/lilypond-devel@gnu.org/msg30917.html
and tell me what is "semi
Reinhold Kainhofer writes:
> And before that, in October/November 2009 there were some mails about
> how to handle someone, who back then didn't really show proper
> behavior.
If you compare how I react to things then and now, you'll find I have
not changed one bit. Any purported display of pro
Am Donnerstag, 4. November 2010, um 21:56:24 schrieb Valentin Villenave:
> > 2) Agree that an OSS project can, in theory, have a private
> > mailing list. And apologize.
>
> *sigh* I do apologize if you felt offended (which you obviously do).
> However, I can assure you that my goal is not to mak
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
> I spent 5 minutes trying to post my latest reply, but the forum
> software continually complained that I had used wrong words, tags,
> or symbols, and thus it rejected my comment as spam. I am posting
> my reply here instead.
I am not sure
This email is a follow-up to comments in:
http://news.lilynet.net/The-LilyPond-Report-22
I spent 5 minutes trying to post my latest reply, but the forum
software continually complained that I had used wrong words, tags,
or symbols, and thus it rejected my comment as spam. I am posting
my reply he
24 matches
Mail list logo
