Dear Everyone,
I've often wondered what happened to the Accessibility project in the
last few months (especially since Ms. Waters went inactive). Well, as
it turns out the Accessibility team has been basically one person:
WilliamH.
So, we took the opportunity this evening to adjust the mailing a
Chris White wrote:
Well, the problem that occurs here is the verification process. With MD5, you
can hit most upstream sites, and they'll have an MD5SUM avaliable that you
can authenticate against.
Well if you care enough to verify this, you can easily create an md5sum
of the fetched distfil
On Wednesday 13 September 2006 23:18, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i'm going to be fixing the autoconf/automake wrappers so that they no
> longer require all versions of autoconf/automake ... this will resolve the
> annoying circular dependency but at the sametime packages need to make sure
> that if th
On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 14:37 -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
> >
> > You cannot allow things to get out of hand like they do. Everyone here
> > obviously wants to make gentoo better. However, NOT everyone has the right
> > to do so.
>
> Not everyone has the right? I think the GPL would preclude that
>
You cannot allow things to get out of hand like they do. Everyone here
obviously wants to make gentoo better. However, NOT everyone has the right
to do so.
Not everyone has the right? I think the GPL would preclude that
statement. Not everyone has the *drive*, or the social skills, or the
On Thursday 21 September 2006 08:54, Hanno Böck wrote:
> I think sha256/512 is the only thing that makes sense at the moment, as it
> most probably will stay secure for quite a while and we don't have real
> alternatives. So imho use sha256, get rid of everything else, because that
> rarely improve
Am Donnerstag, 21. September 2006 16:49 schrieb Vlastimil Babka:
> Although the "more secure than MD5" part is now questionable, I suppose
> the "directly available in python" part still holds?
From "What's new in python 2.5"
13.3 The hashlib package
A new hashlib module, written by Gregory P.
Peter wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:13:23 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
I just want to prefix this by saying that I was simply going to ignore
your posts in this thread completely due to your obviously inflammatory
nature at the beginning. Now that you're posting actual constructive
criticism
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:06:16 -0400, Mike Kelly wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:43:16 + (UTC)
> "Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a
>> timely fashion. And, any potential devs would be rather turned off by
>> the goings on he
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:13:23 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> I just want to prefix this by saying that I was simply going to ignore
> your posts in this thread completely due to your obviously inflammatory
> nature at the beginning. Now that you're posting actual constructive
> criticisms, I'd l
I just want to prefix this by saying that I was simply going to ignore
your posts in this thread completely due to your obviously inflammatory
nature at the beginning. Now that you're posting actual constructive
criticisms, I'd like to respond. By the way, thank you for changing
your tone to some
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:43:16 + (UTC)
"Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a
> timely fashion. And, any potential devs would be rather turned off by
> the goings on here. You guys seem to try and stifle innovation at
> every turn -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> (well, it's run more like a commune, but anyway).
I *knew* someone else was using my soap!!!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFE+t8rsJQqN81j74RAuYUAJ4qa9GuyISG5PdVHq3Nuo58lBmmFgCgk4z/
v9O
Peter,
Your two cents are worth a lot. Pretty much all of what you've said has
been echoed time and again on this list and on the -core list (and
probably an irc channel or two).
The concept of "business" aside, the points you make about having a
leadership in place are on target, in my opinion.
Peter wrote: [Fri Sep 22 2006, 07:29:57AM CDT]
> We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are
> customers. No users, no distro.
Actually, I still think that agriffis was correct in his assertion that
most devs work on Gentoo for their own interests, and that the
developers
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 08:55:14 -0400, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 12:29 +, Peter wrote:
>
>
>> We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are
>> customers. No users, no distro.
>
> That is not strictly true. You can have a distro without users --
> no
On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 12:29 +, Peter wrote:
> We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are
> customers. No users, no distro.
That is not strictly true. You can have a distro without users --
nobody but you would be using it -- it's still a distro. It all depends
on
Peter wrote:
> We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are
> customers. No users, no distro.
I haven't received a single paycheck in two years. What a shitty business.
--
Kind Regards,
Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 developer
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:14:24 +0200, Jochen Maes wrote:
snip...
>> I appreciate your POV. Yes, you can't expect too much from volunteers.
>> But, in a worldwide linux distribution, which is run more or less like
>> a business, there is a higher standard that should be adhered to. I
>> don't accept
Peter wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:15:14 +0200, Jochen Maes wrote:
>
> snip...
>
>
>>> glad you were an exception.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> glad i never knew you when i was a gentoo dev... I know one thing, you
>> won't ever get a hump out of me!
>>
>
> You're arguing a different point.
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:15:14 +0200, Jochen Maes wrote:
snip...
>> glad you were an exception.
>>
>>
> glad i never knew you when i was a gentoo dev... I know one thing, you
> won't ever get a hump out of me!
You're arguing a different point. I was commenting on the time delay, and
you respond
Peter wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:25:26 +1000, Andrew Ross wrote:
>
> snip...
>
>>> That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a timely
>>> fashion.
>>>
>> As a recently recruited developer, I'd just like to say that I was very
>> happy with the approval time of m
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:25:26 +1000, Andrew Ross wrote:
snip...
>>
>> That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a timely
>> fashion.
>
> As a recently recruited developer, I'd just like to say that I was very
> happy with the approval time of my recruitment bug (#139633), wh
Peter wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:01:02 -0400, Mike Pagano wrote:
>> Maybe a recruiting drive to help with the maintenance. A typical
>> business brings on new blood and assigns them just that role to free up
>> more senior developers for more complicated projects.
>>
>> New developers should
Alin Nastac wrote:
> Our civilized disputes are taken place in public because we are an open
> organization. If this looks bad in the eyes of some, so be it, but
> please keep your opinions out of this list.
Except that they're not always that civilized, which was his entire point.
--
Kind Regar
Dice R. Random wrote:
> What control mechanisms are there within the Gentoo community to keep
> a few bad apples from spoiling the whole barrel, as it were? I do not
> wish to name any names, but it seems to me from having skimmed this
> list for the past few years that there are a couple people w
26 matches
Mail list logo
