On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 09:14 +0100, Robert Helling wrote:
> On 16.12.2013, at 00:40, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
>
> Dirk,
>
> > Something like: a 4 weeks window to merge new features after a release.
> > Then 8 weeks of bug fixing, documenting, translating, and finally a week
> > to do the release. Whic
On 16.12.2013, at 00:40, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
Dirk,
> Something like: a 4 weeks window to merge new features after a release.
> Then 8 weeks of bug fixing, documenting, translating, and finally a week
> to do the release. Which gives us quarterly releases.
I am a bit hesitant about this. For dy
On 16 December 2013 02:21, Lutz Vieweg wrote:
> On 12/16/2013 01:01 AM, Lubomir I. Ivanov wrote:
>>
>> On 16 December 2013 01:56, Lutz Vieweg wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> PS: I'm writing this on a laptop that I just had to boot with
>>> an ancient linux-3.8 kernel just because the also installed
>>> linux-
> I did report bugs regardings USB regressions before, but the
> particular adapter I'm using right now is one I borrowed from
> the hotel I'm currently staying at. (They surprisingly do not
> have wireless, but wired InterNet access, only, in the rooms.)
In certain hotel chains this is more commo
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Lutz Vieweg wrote:
>
> Also, I wouldn't want to dilute attention (if there is any)
> from the one open USB bug that currently bothers me most (#53211).
That one should be fixed in 3.12.
I don't think it got back-ported to stable, though - but if you can
verify th
On 12/16/2013 01:01 AM, Lubomir I. Ivanov wrote:
On 16 December 2013 01:56, Lutz Vieweg wrote:
PS: I'm writing this on a laptop that I just had to boot with
an ancient linux-3.8 kernel just because the also installed
linux-3.11 kernel won't work with the darned USB-EtherNet
adapter... I wished
On 16 December 2013 01:56, Lutz Vieweg wrote:
>
> PS: I'm writing this on a laptop that I just had to boot with
> an ancient linux-3.8 kernel just because the also installed
> linux-3.11 kernel won't work with the darned USB-EtherNet
> adapter... I wished the USB subsystem of Linux wasn't
> on a t
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 00:56 +0100, Lutz Vieweg wrote:
> On 12/16/2013 12:40 AM, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> > that caught your attention, didn't it?
>
> Yes, kind of...
>
> > Comments (besides the obvious "you're on drugs, Dirk")?
>
> I wonder whether an application for a very specific purpose
> like
On 12/16/2013 12:40 AM, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
that caught your attention, didn't it?
Yes, kind of...
Comments (besides the obvious "you're on drugs, Dirk")?
I wonder whether an application for a very specific purpose
like subsurface should actually be expected to change often
enough to justif
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 01:48 +0200, Lubomir I. Ivanov wrote:
> On 16 December 2013 01:40, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> >
> > Hehe...
> >
> > that caught your attention, didn't it?
> >
> > I am thinking of switching to a time based release methodology. There
> > are a couple of weird obscure open source pr
On 16 December 2013 01:40, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
>
> Hehe...
>
> that caught your attention, didn't it?
>
> I am thinking of switching to a time based release methodology. There
> are a couple of weird obscure open source projects that have dabbled
> with this and apparently this is working well for
Hehe...
that caught your attention, didn't it?
I am thinking of switching to a time based release methodology. There
are a couple of weird obscure open source projects that have dabbled
with this and apparently this is working well for them... :-)
So for 4.1 this is mainly a crazy idea, but sta
12 matches
Mail list logo
