On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Shaun McCance wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 10:40 +, Allan Day wrote:
>> The first is the apparent lack of consensus. I was following what I
>> understood to be good practice, and even went out if my way to be
>> considerate towards the docs team. It's frustra
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 10:40 +, Allan Day wrote:
> The first is the apparent lack of consensus. I was following what I
> understood to be good practice, and even went out if my way to be
> considerate towards the docs team. It's frustrating to then be told
> that I'm breaking the rules. I largel
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:40, Allan Day wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Shaun McCance wrote:
>> Replying to two in one, to save electrons.
>>
>> On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 13:03 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Allan Day wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Now, if w
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Shaun McCance wrote:
> Replying to two in one, to save electrons.
>
> On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 13:03 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Allan Day wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Now, if we want to define and write down an exact list of things we do
Replying to two in one, to save electrons.
On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 13:03 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Allan Day wrote:
> >>
> >> Now, if we want to define and write down an exact list of things we do
> >> not require approval for (but still require notification),
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Allan Day wrote:
>>
>> Now, if we want to define and write down an exact list of things we do
>> not require approval for (but still require notification), I'm OK with
>> that.
>
> I don't recall suggesting that you construct "an exact list of things
> we do not re
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Shaun McCance wrote:
>> I'd also add that one sentence is not an adequate amount of guidance
>> for this process.
>
> The sentence looks clear to me. It doesn't say "maybe" or "only major"
> or "at your discretion". It says "No UI changes".
>
> "No UI changes may b
On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 12:08 +, Allan Day wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Andre Klapper wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 18:36 +, Allan Day wrote:
> >> And yet there is also an understanding that minor cosmetic changes
> >> don't need a UI freeze exception.
> >
> > https://live.g
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Andre Klapper wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 18:36 +, Allan Day wrote:
>> And yet there is also an understanding that minor cosmetic changes
>> don't need a UI freeze exception.
>
> https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointThree#Schedule says "No UI changes may
> be m
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 18:36 +, Allan Day wrote:
> And yet there is also an understanding that minor cosmetic changes
> don't need a UI freeze exception.
https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointThree#Schedule says "No UI changes may
be made without approval from the release-team and notification to
gn
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 18:36 +, Allan Day wrote:
> And yet there is also an understanding that minor cosmetic changes
> don't need a UI freeze exception.
That's never been my understanding.
--
Shaun
___
release-team@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Shaun McCance wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 11:33 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Andre Klapper wrote:
>> > Hi Allan,
>> >
>> > On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 18:50 +, Allan Day wrote:
>> >> I've just pushed a minor change to the GNOME
> whitespace around - everybody who looks at the before and after
> screenshots will recognize them as the same dialog...
on a side note, the patch does not match the before/after screenshots
___
release-team@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listi
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 11:33 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Andre Klapper wrote:
> > Hi Allan,
> >
> > On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 18:50 +, Allan Day wrote:
> >> I've just pushed a minor change to the GNOME Shell theme [1]. This is
> >> a small visual change [2, 3],
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Andre Klapper wrote:
> Hi Allan,
>
> On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 18:50 +, Allan Day wrote:
>> I've just pushed a minor change to the GNOME Shell theme [1]. This is
>> a small visual change [2, 3], and it doesn't
>> affect anything functionally. It does change the loo
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Andre Klapper wrote:
> Hi Allan,
>
> On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 18:50 +, Allan Day wrote:
>> I've just pushed a minor change to the GNOME Shell theme [1]. This is
>> a small visual change [2, 3], and it doesn't
>> affect anything functionally. It does change the look
Hi Allan,
On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 18:50 +, Allan Day wrote:
> I've just pushed a minor change to the GNOME Shell theme [1]. This is
> a small visual change [2, 3], and it doesn't
> affect anything functionally. It does change the look of the dialogs
> very slightly though. It was suggested that
17 matches
Mail list logo
