This will probably remove the need for -core(everything gets leaked out
anyway) but that's a path to cross later.
If it will remove the need for -core, why not move some future -dev content
to -core, and make -dev the new list you called -project?
So, if you move discussions where non-devs
Most mailing list systems have a built-in provision for moderation. The
devs who haven't been meta-moderated out (to use the Slashdot term)
would have access to it, and could approve or reject messages from
non-devs. I guess.
Wouldnt this allow for the following:
Devs A, B, C are argueing
Am Freitag, 6. Juli 2007 14:09 schrieb Samuli Suominen:
Missed something before.. But after reading this it leads me to
conclusion nero-3.0.0.0 needs RESTRICT=fetch? Would someone be kind
enough to take a look for me to get a second opinion as it might be out
of context / I'm overlooking
Am Freitag, 22. Juni 2007 17:48 schrieb Marijn Schouten (hkBst):
Hi list,
I think it would be good if packages.g.o would link to sources.g.o and vice
versa. Interconnecting these sources of information would make them more
valuable. I thought it was obvious so I opened
Am Mittwoch 06 Juni 2007 17:42 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
Is there a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked
entirely, as has been suggested?
The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
proctors.
I feel like _anyone_* who willingly acts against a
Am Mittwoch 06 Juni 2007 17:53 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
could keep your fucking trap shut?
If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure.
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
I'm claiming it because plenty of other people agree. You *did* see the
response that the proctors got from
Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
I'm sure they have the best intentions but I've never seen any clear
guidelines for them. They use their best judgement what to handle and
what not to but due to language barriers, cultural differences etc. it's
difficult to judge.
The guideline, as far as I understood
Josh Sled wrote:
I find it disappointing (maybe telling, if one is less charitable) that
the Proctors never censured the original poster for either the tone of the
message, nor the personal invective it contained, and still haven't. I'd
imagine clear violations of the CoC to result in at
drawn in flames.
drown, please excuse my spelling.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Dawid Węgliński wrote:
Dnia 06-06-2007, śro o godzinie 18:32 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
napisał(a):
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
Daniel Drake wrote:
Is the above correct?
AFAIK, yes.
Daniel Drake wrote:
I can understand that the system may have been dreamed up with this in
mind, and this certainly isn't an unreasonable design, but I don't see
the corresponding text in the GLEP.
Which does not seem to be a problem to
Hans de Graaff wrote:
Hi,
I realize that we are in the middle of a huge discussion on GLEP 42 news
items, but I think I have a need for such a news item at the moment, and
getting more items to discuss may help move the discussion forward. I'm
appending the news item below.
That said,
Am Sonntag 06 Mai 2007 12:15 schrieb Petteri Räty:
+# ChangeLog for dev-java/jid3
+# Copyright 1999-2007 Gentoo Foundation; Distributed under the GPL v2
+# $Header: $
Shouldn't this be 2007-2007 or just 2007?
Regards,
Petteri
As I am not a lawyer,
what would happen if years are left out
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
After. For before, use Display-If-Installed: on a lower version.
See below.
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
You want Display-If-Installed:, because users that
have earlier versions will be affected at some point in the future.
I'm afraid that this is not correct, because
Am Sonntag 06 Mai 2007 18:42 schrieb Marius Mauch:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In particular, this field could be my previous understanding
of Display-If-Upgrading-From-To namely
Display-Before-Upgrading-From-To which would fit the requirements
defined by the GLEP:
Which is the same as a
I think we can see different aspects here:
0) Being able to display items for packages which might become available to
the stable branch after unknown time. (available yet)
1) Being able to show items right before merging, the one last last
minute warning, that is Display-Before-Upgrade-From-To
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sun, 6 May 2007 19:24:11 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, in the case of the combination, the user would see the item
directly, in the case of Display-If-Upgrading-From-To the user would
only see it if he really wants to upgrade, which is last minute.
No no no no
Am Sonntag 06 Mai 2007 20:21 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
On Sun, 6 May 2007 14:17:29 -0400
Dan Meltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
which elog could easily be extended to do.
But which elog does not do by default, and for good reason.
and what good reason would that be?
That elog is
Am Sonntag 06 Mai 2007 22:38 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:33:55 +0200
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a):
On Sun, 6 May 2007 16:00:56 -0400
Dan Meltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Er, making elog logged by default would not solve the
Have there been news items yet, which mentioned changes in config files, which
did (as far as i understood it) not break the directly next version which is
upgraded too, but just made a bunch of warnings arise that the config file
uses the old format which now is deprecated, telling the user to
Wernfried Haas wrote:
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:21:47PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
So the only important question is whether the news items are useful for
the people who will see them. In this case we know the answer is yes.
No one answered my question asked in Message-ID:
[EMAIL
Am Samstag 05 Mai 2007 22:44 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
On Sat, 05 May 2007 22:37:37 +0200
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Erm, not really? This is about proper usage of GLEP42 stuff.
Yes, it is about proper usage of GLEP 42. This news item is one example
of that.
There's nothing
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2007 22:37:37 +0200
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Erm, not really? This is about proper usage of GLEP42 stuff.
Yes, it is about proper usage of GLEP 42. This news item is one example
of that.
There's nothing critical about your * stuff.
Sure
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
That'll just increase the amount of disagreement about news items
because it'll give people more pointless wording to argue over.
After all, something I agree with.
It's quite simple. If releasing a news item improves the user
experience of affected users more than not
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Paludis producing a warning (as opposed to a lower level notice --
Paludis has different levels for log notices, of which 'warning' is
the highest) is something that is considered critical enough that the
user should fix it before continuing. Were it not critical, a
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
No, but it affects the impact upon user experience, which is the entire
point of the process. This is, after all, about delivering what's best
for affected users.
No it is not.
It is about wether or not this news item would fit into the current set of
rules, which it
I wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
This thread is not, however, about Paludis. Please keep future moaning
about Paludis in the appropriate thread.
Perfectly correct, it is about this news item being critical or not.
I were not the one who started to talk about log levels, which is
off-topic.
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
Taking into account the other reasonable input, how about the name of
attribute 'automatic-bug' ?
Well, to complicate things even further, if you approach that from a semantic
angle, automatic-bug is just as wrong as the others, since no bug is
automatically created...
Ned Ludd wrote:
I don't see anything wrong with how it was proposed originally using
contact=0
The reason why contact isn't perfect was given by Mart leio Raudsepp yet,
namely:
contact=0 in metadata.xml in this context means that the automatic
reassigning should not assign to that
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
[...] the attribute should only indicate if the maintainer entry should be
used for any automatic process at all, not how to use it.
Oh, I thought you were talking about the name of the variable.
I intend that the first non-excluded maintainer entry is the one used
Dan Meltzer wrote:
Sounds good... one suggestion I have is to try and detect new ebuild
submissions and resassign them to m-w automatically as well. maybe a
checkbox this is a new ebuild or some other way to automatically detect
it?
Why not introduce a Case 5 which is similar to:
1. None of
Joshua Jackson wrote:
Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
On 4/26/07, Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Case 2 - Metadata contains a single maintainer
--
- The herd field is not used.
- The maintainer address is used as the bugzilla assignee.
Daniel Drake wrote:
That aside, I like having myself in the metadata alongside the herd, to
point out that I am the primary maintainer within the herd for the
package in question. It is also useful for others so that when they have
questions about the package, they know who to approach on IRC
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
Could contact be named differently then?
contact=0 in metadata.xml in this context means that the automatic
reassigning should not assign to that maintainer, but when a user looks
whom to ask specific questions from and sees contact=0 he/she will
understand he/she is not
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
Both 'assign' and 'cc' (and derivations thereof are not suitable).
Why not?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Hi List,
The following mail has been written on Tuesday before alot of the recent
discussions. It hasn't been changed except for three passages, which I left
out (marked with [...]) which had no actual content, and don't make sense
to be send to the list, but only to the actual addressee, who
Vlastimil Babka wrote:
Steve Long wrote:
snip
I wonder if the CoC should also mention such things (remember also
Enrico Weigelt's mails) as unacceptable behaviour. Or is it already
covered by one of the descriptions although I don't see it?
--
Vlastimil Babka (Caster)
Gentoo/Java
Am Mittwoch 14 März 2007 19:18 schrieb Mauricio Lima Pilla:
We don't need to bother hunting all the contributions in all open-source
projects to avoid them, as it would be much of a PITA. We can be selective
and not accept code directly submitted by such users, which would clearly
state that
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
I cannot agree on the Genstef-thingy, nor can I proof you wrong, but I'd be
please if in general such things could be done anonymous as it is in some way
FUD and might fuel flames...userrel and userreps are there to be talked to
about such things.
* The wrong idea of
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
All that we'd find out is the kind of user that actively follows
requests for information and responds to them. Gentoo currently doesn't
have a way of interacting with all the other users out there...
Of course you would only find out about the user that responds to the
Duncan wrote:
As an alternative [...] the list is carried by gmane.org [...]
There also would be http://archives.gentoo.org/
so those users also wouldnt be dependent on a service not run by gentoo.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:57:09 +
Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And if you think the way you have carried on is anything approaching
decent, you clearly haven't read the guidelines... Can we stop now
please?
Based on a cursory view of my gentoo-dev folder,
Stephen Bennett wrote:
The only possible conclusion I can see to draw from this post is that
because distrowatch posts an uninformed article about how Gentoo is
dying, you need to drag up a dead thread for no apparent reason. Please
enlighten me if there's something I missed.
You seem to have
Dear List,
as Gentoo is not the only project with large mailing lists, others suffer from
similar problems.
This is an overview on how other (well know) (community driven) projects
handle flaming and similar things.
Only use this thread to add further links or information as well as to correct
Tom Wesley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please could you stop attempting to create new threads by replying to
existing emails to the list? It's considered bad netiquette and
generally makes new threads difficult to spot. The list is hard enough
to parse as it is, without this added hindrance.
I
One thing worth noting is that we've just decided that the policy needs
to be updated so hopefully we'll see a new/expanded policy in a few
weeks.
Good. Maybe also a link to this netiquette on
http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/lists.xml might also be helpfull?
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing
Rob C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am a new Gentoo developer but I have worked on a number of other small
projects. This list is a disgrace and most flames are nothing but
showboating. If you have an issue then deal with it directly with whomever
is causing the problem.
Dealing it who causes the
Stuart Longland [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gentoo Foundation) wrote:
How's this for an idea though... Rather than banning *people*... why
not temporarily ban a thread? I know this is easily possible on forum
threads -- mailing lists are more difficult, but if one could lock a
thread for a day
Dear List,
1. Anyone who is impolite get's kicked off.
Who defines 'impolite'? It's a cultural thing, and given that we have
developers and users from all over the world, we span a lot of vastly
different cultures.
I am aware of this issue, but it is not needed to solve it at once or
please ignore
if you wanted to test wether you successfully registered you could also have
waited 12 hours, that is, you could have waited for as long as you would
expect it to take unitl the next mail is sent to this list, which is unlikely
to be longer than 12hrs.
cheers,
daniel
--
Yuri Vasilevski wrote:
[...]
But at the benefit of having less confusion
for users about What the heck is a GPL-2+? for at last the same period
of time.
[...]
So users will have to check what's the
meaning of that + at the end of GPL-2+, so I think it'll create much
more confusion than the
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
The primary motivation for GoboLinux seems to be to make
it easy to find which files go with which applications. You already
have that information of course, in /var/db/pkg/.../CONTENTS.
Michael Weyershäuser wrote:
Yes, if you come from windows the current scheme is
Hi everybody,
as i am lazy, i will simply copy and paste the two relevant emails written by
me:
using gzip compression level 4 isnt the default of cvs and might
generate
alot of load on the server. therefore i suggest letting cvs fall back to
it's default -z0 It might be
54 matches
Mail list logo
