On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 04:26:03PM -0500, Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> > I'm quite sure others others have such projects on their mind which
> > are not publicly findable yet. (sogrep to devtools for example)
>
> sogrep as it currently exists on the soyuz build server depends on
On 2/6/19 4:16 PM, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I still believe we should take some initiative on thse issues. What we
> have so far is:
>
> - Getting involved page, not sure where it's linked from? Only findable
> on the wiki. [1] Which links to a nice list of projects with an
> alread
Hi,
I still believe we should take some initiative on thse issues. What we
have so far is:
- Getting involved page, not sure where it's linked from? Only findable
on the wiki. [1] Which links to a nice list of projects with an
already dedicated irc channel and mailing lists. (I was not even a
On 05/23/17 at 10:23pm, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
>
> infrastructure side (which is in fact too generic term that could be
> better described). I am totally in love with What can I do for
> Mozilla?[1] which is open source, so why not steal this wonderful idea?
> But it also means we need a way
[2017-05-24 13:08:18 +0200] Bartłomiej Piotrowski:
> How long do you expect people to be happy to send their changes to
> /dev/null before they give up? Because I already met some people that
> are more clever than me in every packaging related area that decided to
> switch to a distribution where
I personally prefer patch submission and discussion via mailing lists to
pull requests and web interfaces. As a maintainer of aurweb, I would
consider it a setback to move to something that makes maintenance work
more cumbersome for me. However, if it turns out to improve either the
quality or qu
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:15:09AM +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> I disagree, I have the feeling there are a lot of ideas which would
> improve Arch Linux a lot. Which are now not being worked on (as far as
> I know). Therefore I think it would be great if there was a page where
> first time
El Wed, 24 May 2017 13:08:18 +0200, Bartłomiej Piotrowski escribió:
> We are open source distribution with pretty much closed development
> model. It is unsustainable in the longer term. There are 413 orphan
> packages in our repositories (excluding i686), some of the out-of-date
> flags are unhan
On 2017-05-23 22:47, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> In my opinion writing emails to strangers should be part of the
> application process. In my duties as packager maintainer I often find
> myself writing emails to various persons I've never met: other distro
> devs, upstream maintainers, etc. I'm sure the
On 05/23/17 at 10:47am, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> [2017-05-23 22:23:51 +0200] Bartłomiej Piotrowski:
> > Another thing that I heard in last few months isthat it is actually hard
> > for potential TU candidates to find a sponsor. While I believe it is
> > perfectly fine to e-mail few potential sponsors
On Tue, 23 May 2017 at 22:23:51, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
> One of the problems I keep hearing about is that there is no clear place
> where potential contributors could start. Sure, some things seem obvious
> to us: take care of some wiki article or adopt orphan AUR packages. It
> isn't actual
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 2:19 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini
wrote:
> What I would be inclined to accept would be that packages are, at least at
> first, always
> co-maintained by sponsor and sponsored TU. This way we can assure that new
> TU's can handle
> ll the tasks related to maintaining a package. C
Em maio 23, 2017 17:23 Bartłomiej Piotrowski escreveu:
One of the problems I keep hearing about is that there is no clear place
where potential contributors could start. Sure, some things seem obvious
to us: take care of some wiki article or adopt orphan AUR packages. It
isn't actually that easy
[2017-05-23 22:23:51 +0200] Bartłomiej Piotrowski:
> Another thing that I heard in last few months isthat it is actually hard
> for potential TU candidates to find a sponsor. While I believe it is
> perfectly fine to e-mail few potential sponsors to ask for opinion,
> throwing random messages at pe
Hi all,
Spending some time outside the regular Arch circles, I realized that the
way we "outreach" potential contributors is at least imperfect.
One of the problems I keep hearing about is that there is no clear place
where potential contributors could start. Sure, some things seem obvious
to us:
15 matches
Mail list logo
