Am 03.02.2014 20:52, schrieb Alexander Holler:
Am 03.02.2014 19:56, schrieb Daniel Pocock:
The Debian stuff is still in the works, had a great discussion with
Matthew and some other free software projects at FOSDEM.
Do you've created a task force which comes to action whenever someone
has the
Am 03.02.2014 19:56, schrieb Daniel Pocock:
> The Debian stuff is still in the works, had a great discussion with
> Matthew and some other free software projects at FOSDEM.
Do you've created a task force which comes to action whenever someone
has the impertinence to publicly critize (some issues
On 03/02/14 19:09, Dave Cridland wrote:
> On 3 Feb 2014 16:44, "Andreas Kuckartz" wrote:
>>
>> Claudiu Curcă:
>>> 1. Why is that comment classified as "XMPP bashing"?
>>
>> As far as I know Daniel is mostly an SIP guy and is trying to _help_ the
>> XMPP community by pointing to that comment. But
On 3 Feb 2014 16:44, "Andreas Kuckartz" wrote:
>
> Claudiu Curcă:
> > 1. Why is that comment classified as "XMPP bashing"?
>
> As far as I know Daniel is mostly an SIP guy and is trying to _help_ the
> XMPP community by pointing to that comment. But I also do not think that
> the comment is "bashi
Claudiu Curcă:
> 1. Why is that comment classified as "XMPP bashing"?
As far as I know Daniel is mostly an SIP guy and is trying to _help_ the
XMPP community by pointing to that comment. But I also do not think that
the comment is "bashing" anything.
> why is the comment interesting to the operat
: XMPP Operators Group
Subject: [Operators] XMPP bashing
Maybe somebody would like to reply to this:
http://danielpocock.com/comment/11366#comment-11366
Maybe somebody would like to reply to this:
http://danielpocock.com/comment/11366#comment-11366
