Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
Duncan wrote: Dale posted on Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:43:43 -0500 as excerpted: It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for them to just go away. Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers on the vine and nothing much happens. There may be a need for -project but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending threads to it. Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised. I think that was the point. Having the list and telling people the topic belongs there is the polite way of telling them their output's better directed to /dev/null (which is of course the the geeky *ix way of saying "shutup already!"), without actually restricting someone's right to make their point... just that they might as well be posting to their private diary for the number of others that'll actually read it. Yep, I'm waiting to hear that this needs to be moved to -project any time now. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
Piotr Jaroszyński wrote: On 19 July 2010 01:27, Duncan<1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: Dale posted on Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:43:43 -0500 as excerpted: It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for them to just go away. Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers on the vine and nothing much happens. There may be a need for -project but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending threads to it. Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised. I think that was the point. Having the list and telling people the topic belongs there is the polite way of telling them their output's better directed to /dev/null (which is of course the the geeky *ix way of saying "shutup already!"), without actually restricting someone's right to make their point... just that they might as well be posting to their private diary for the number of others that'll actually read it. Yeah, that's exactly a thread that belongs to -project and not -dev. I think you may be missing the point of Duncan's reply. My point is, when someone doesn't want someone with a different way of looking at things to post on this list, they tell them to go to -project. They seem to think that some people are stupid and won't realize that what they are really saying is to "go away" and/or "shut up". Thing is, some people are actually smart enough to see what is going on and what that means. They sometimes go away, far away. Then some people wonder why, just why, Gentoo has the reputation that it does. I don't wonder myself. I figured that out a good long while ago. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
On 19 July 2010 01:27, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > Dale posted on Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:43:43 -0500 as excerpted: > >> It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for >> them to just go away. Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers >> on the vine and nothing much happens. There may be a need for -project >> but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending >> threads to it. Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to >> -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see >> the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised. > > I think that was the point. Having the list and telling people the topic > belongs there is the polite way of telling them their output's better > directed to /dev/null (which is of course the the geeky *ix way of saying > "shutup already!"), without actually restricting someone's right to make > their point... just that they might as well be posting to their private > diary for the number of others that'll actually read it. Yeah, that's exactly a thread that belongs to -project and not -dev. -- Best Regards Piotr Jaroszyński
[gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
Dale posted on Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:43:43 -0500 as excerpted: > It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for > them to just go away. Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers > on the vine and nothing much happens. There may be a need for -project > but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending > threads to it. Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to > -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see > the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised. I think that was the point. Having the list and telling people the topic belongs there is the polite way of telling them their output's better directed to /dev/null (which is of course the the geeky *ix way of saying "shutup already!"), without actually restricting someone's right to make their point... just that they might as well be posting to their private diary for the number of others that'll actually read it. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
Petteri Räty wrote: On 07/18/2010 05:21 PM, Christian Faulhammer wrote: Hi, Theo Chatzimichos: On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Christian Faulhammer wrote: What about getting rid of -project? V-Li WHAT? Why?? Because it is useless in my eyes. All discussion could also take place here and most people mix it up anyway. The distinction is too blurry. V-Li The "tone in gentoo" etc threads recently belonged to gentoo-project. Those threads are usually the ones that grow the longest. If people want those on gentoo-dev then gentoo-project is not needed. Granted most of the time the list is not that active but so are many other mailing lists we have. I don't think this is something we should have on the council agenda without the issues having had it's own thread (on gentoo-project according to current rules). Regards, Petteri It always seemed to me that people want to send threads to -project for them to just go away. Once a thread goes to -project, it just whithers on the vine and nothing much happens. There may be a need for -project but if almost no one is going to be there, there is no point sending threads to it. Maybe developers should be required to subscribe to -project so that even if a thread is sent there, they still get to see the postings and deal with the issues that are being raised. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
On 07/18/2010 05:21 PM, Christian Faulhammer wrote: > Hi, > > Theo Chatzimichos : > >> On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Christian Faulhammer >> wrote: >>> What about getting rid of -project? >>> >>> V-Li >> >> WHAT? Why?? > > Because it is useless in my eyes. All discussion could also take > place here and most people mix it up anyway. The distinction is too > blurry. > > V-Li > The "tone in gentoo" etc threads recently belonged to gentoo-project. Those threads are usually the ones that grow the longest. If people want those on gentoo-dev then gentoo-project is not needed. Granted most of the time the list is not that active but so are many other mailing lists we have. I don't think this is something we should have on the council agenda without the issues having had it's own thread (on gentoo-project according to current rules). Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
Hi, Theo Chatzimichos : > On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Christian Faulhammer > wrote: > > What about getting rid of -project? > > > > V-Li > > WHAT? Why?? Because it is useless in my eyes. All discussion could also take place here and most people mix it up anyway. The distinction is too blurry. V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode http://www.faulhammer.org/> signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Christian Faulhammer wrote: > What about getting rid of -project? > > V-Li WHAT? Why??
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming Council meeting on July 26th, 1900 UTC
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" : > I cross-posted this email to both gentoo-dev and gentoo-council mls as > Brian used the former and Alex started this thread in the latter. > Which ML do we want to use? What about getting rid of -project? V-Li - -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode http://www.faulhammer.org/> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkxCmdoACgkQNQqtfCuFnePkTwCeP6EFUtcd33aBlA5ChHtYqIQd Ve8An3C3BPWmpqgcxX5NFJgU6X7+xcCF =C8OY -END PGP SIGNATURE-
