On 10/28/18 4:45 PM, Morten Linderud via aur-general wrote:
> It's frankly embarrassing that it has to go this far. Eli is avoiding the
> discussion on IRC and refuses to answer.
So, is the appropriate fix then, is to do some more shaming on the
mailing list? Actually, by the time things got
On October 28, 2018 6:42:09 PM EDT, Santiago Torres-Arias
wrote:
>Hello everyone.
>
>I've been following this email thread quite closely and without
>participating as I was hoping to keep opinions to myself --- I don't
>think I have much questions other than what's already asked for
>Konstantin
On October 28, 2018 6:42:09 PM EDT, Santiago Torres-Arias
wrote:
>Hello everyone.
>
>I've been following this email thread quite closely and without
>participating as I was hoping to keep opinions to myself --- I don't
>think I have much questions other than what's already asked for
>Konstantin
Hello everyone.
I've been following this email thread quite closely and without
participating as I was hoping to keep opinions to myself --- I don't
think I have much questions other than what's already asked for
Konstantin --- and make up my mind for voting.
It's clear that it is time to take a
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 04:02:40PM -0400, Daniel M. Capella via aur-general
wrote:
> It's upsetting and embarrassing that the only staffer to stand against this
> behavior directly in the ML is the applicant's sponsor. This disrespectful
> behavior occurs all the time. Can we enforce our Code of
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 10:03 PM Daniel M. Capella via aur-general
wrote:
>
> On October 28, 2018 2:42:31 PM EDT, Baptiste Jonglez
> wrote:
> >On 28-10-18, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> >> (endless rambling)
> >
> >Can we please stop this futile bike-shedding exercise? It does little
>
On October 28, 2018 2:42:31 PM EDT, Baptiste Jonglez
wrote:
>On 28-10-18, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
>> (endless rambling)
>
>Can we please stop this futile bike-shedding exercise? It does little
>outside of discrediting you and the Arch community as a whole.
>
>I already said so in
On 10/28/18 2:21 PM, Eli Schwartz wrote:
> The problem I see is in your mindset -- I don't think you approach
> packaging with due respect for quality.
Okay, enough about packaging, what about dealing with bugs?
Bugs you've opened in the past, 25 in total:
On 28-10-18, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> (endless rambling)
Can we please stop this futile bike-shedding exercise? It does little
outside of discrediting you and the Arch community as a whole.
I already said so in previous discussions, but I am still dismayed at your
and Doug's
On 10/28/18 10:43 AM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>> It is also pretty annoying for me, personally, to be flat-out told
>> (before this TU application process even started) that I personally,
>> would have refused to reopen a bug report for which there was a reopen
>> request, save for a mailing list
On 10/28/18 7:33 AM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> The `python-uproot` package required `python-uproot-methods` in a new
> upstream release. This in turn required `python-awkward-array`. Then,
> `python-awkward-array` listed as requirements (on their page, discussed
> at length and addressed later in
On 28/10/2018 01:40, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 10/27/18 6:12 PM, Christos Nouskas wrote:
>> I've been with Arch since around 2004-5 and I've never seen such a
>> hostility against a contributing user.
>>
>> Konstantin clearly cares about his set of packages because they are
>> the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 28/10/2018 11:36, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> Forgot to mention in my previous email - the [community]
> `python-awkward` does not provide python2 variant, so I can't
> actually delete my AUR package. (This was one of my original bug
> reports.)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 28/10/2018 11:36, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> Forgot to mention in my previous email - the [community] > `python-awkward`
> does not provide python2 variant, so I can't
actually > delete my AUR package. (This was one of my original bug
On 28/10/2018 01:40, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 10/14/18 4:34 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>> Thus, a couple of years ago, I decide to get more involved and
>> contribute. I took on the task to maintain CERN's ROOT package [7] and
>> since then I've involved myself heavily into that,
Hi Eli,
On 28/10/2018 01:40, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 10/14/18 4:34 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>> Thus, a couple of years ago, I decide to get more involved and
>> contribute. I took on the task to maintain CERN's ROOT package [7] and
>> since then I've involved myself heavily
On 10/14/18 4:34 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> Thus, a couple of years ago, I decide to get more involved and
> contribute. I took on the task to maintain CERN's ROOT package [7] and
> since then I've involved myself heavily into that, I'm a contributor to
> the project and I use it daily in my
On 10/27/18 6:12 PM, Christos Nouskas wrote:
> I've been with Arch since around 2004-5 and I've never seen such a
> hostility against a contributing user.
>
> Konstantin clearly cares about his set of packages because they are
> the tools of his trade and of some of his co-workers (at a
>
I've been with Arch since around 2004-5 and I've never seen such a
hostility against a contributing user.
Konstantin clearly cares about his set of packages because they are
the tools of his trade and of some of his co-workers (at a
high-profile institution, not at some pet shop). It's also clear
On 26/10/2018 19:40, Levente Polyak via aur-general wrote:
> Hey Konstantin,
>
> I'm wondering which tool you use to keep track of upstream
> releases? is it urlwatch or such?
>
>
> cheers,
> Levente
>
Personally, the packages I maintain are not that numerous that I need a
tool, so I check a
Hey Konstantin,
I'm wondering which tool you use to keep track of upstream
releases? is it urlwatch or such?
cheers,
Levente
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 10/26/18 2:09 PM, Maksim Fomin via aur-general wrote:
> I see no such attitude. After reading this and previous thread the
> quote above expresses what happened quite neutrally: AUR package was
> used by group of people, after moving package to community, some
> things (important to that group)
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 18:09:50 +
Maksim Fomin via aur-general wrote:
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Friday, October 26, 2018 8:23 PM, Doug Newgard via aur-general
> wrote:
> >
> > You did thank Felix, but then went on to make your true intent extremely
> > clear.
> > You
On Fri, 2018-10-26 at 20:48 +0300, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> I don't understand all the animosity towards the guy in the previous
> few emails.
There was a thread a while back that got a bit heated.
> Is assuming good faith really that far-fetched here? And even if it's
> not, why not be a
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, October 26, 2018 8:23 PM, Doug Newgard via aur-general
wrote:
>
> You did thank Felix, but then went on to make your true intent extremely
> clear.
> You specifically ask why your packages were moved (there doesn't have to be a
> reason), and say
On 26/10/2018 18:23, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 17:29:31 +0100
> Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>
>> On 26/10/2018 15:27, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
>>> I must point out this very recent mailing list thread:
>>>
I don't understand all the animosity towards the guy in the previous few
emails. Is assuming good faith really that far-fetched here? And even if
it's not, why not be a little more professional about it?
On 26/10/2018 17:49, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 10/26/18 12:29 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>> On 26/10/2018 15:27, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
>>> I must point out this very recent mailing list thread:
>>>
On 10/26/18 12:29 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>> 3) Tell bald faced lies about how things transpired on the bug tracker.
> I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. In the many emails I wrote that
> evening, I got confused about one bug being closed, where it wasn't. You
> tried to call me out for lying
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 17:29:31 +0100
Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> On 26/10/2018 15:27, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
> > I must point out this very recent mailing list thread:
> > https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034279.html
> >
> > In this thread, you:
> >
> >
On 10/26/18 12:49 PM, Eli Schwartz wrote:
> I hereby swear to you, and will happily have it notarized if it makes
> you any happier, that I completely ignored your thread when reading your
> mailing list spam.
That is, when reading your reopen request.
--
Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted
On 10/26/18 12:29 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> On 26/10/2018 15:27, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
>> I must point out this very recent mailing list thread:
>> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034279.html
>>
>> In this thread, you:
>>
>> 1) whine about
On 26/10/2018 15:27, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
> I must point out this very recent mailing list thread:
> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034279.html
>
> In this thread, you:
>
> 1) whine about someone taking over *your* packages, because you're the one
I must point out this very recent mailing list thread:
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034279.html
In this thread, you:
1) whine about someone taking over *your* packages, because you're the one that
knows them and has cared for them and, after all, they're
On 14/10/2018 23:24, Levente Polyak via aur-general wrote:
> Hey Konstantin,
>
>
> On 10/14/18 11:41 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
o llvm50
o llvm50-libs
o clang50
> Didn't dig into it myself as its easier to ask, could you maybe
> elaborate why we would need those
Hey Konstantin,
On 10/14/18 11:41 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>>> o llvm50
>>> o llvm50-libs
>>> o clang50
Didn't dig into it myself as its easier to ask, could you maybe
elaborate why we would need those 50 versioned variants? Normally we try
to keep the number of versioned
On 10/14/18 11:41 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> Sure, I can share the load. I've built tensorflow+cuda from scratch a
> couple of times and completely understand the struggle. :)
>
Reminder to always bottom-post on Arch mailinglists ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Sure, I can share the load. I've built tensorflow+cuda from scratch a
couple of times and completely understand the struggle. :)
On 14/10/2018 22:31, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018, 22:34 Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am Konstantin Gizdov [1] [2],
>> (`kgizdov`,
On Sun, Oct 14, 2018, 22:34 Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am Konstantin Gizdov [1] [2],
> (`kgizdov`, `a...@kge.pw`, `kgiz...@gmail.com`)
>
> I would like to apply to be a Trusted User under Baptiste Jonglez's
> sponsorship.
>
> A few words about me:
>
> I am currently a Particle
Hi,
On 14-10-18, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> I am Konstantin Gizdov [1] [2],
> (`kgizdov`, `a...@kge.pw`, `kgiz...@gmail.com`)
>
> I would like to apply to be a Trusted User under Baptiste Jonglez's
> sponsorship.
I confirm my sponsorship of Konstantin. Let the discussion period begin,
it seems
Hello,
I am Konstantin Gizdov [1] [2],
(`kgizdov`, `a...@kge.pw`, `kgiz...@gmail.com`)
I would like to apply to be a Trusted User under Baptiste Jonglez's
sponsorship.
A few words about me:
I am currently a Particle Physics PhD at Univerisity of Edinburgh and I
have used Linux since my early
41 matches
Mail list logo
