Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>
> Should I make community@ available also on EyeBrowse?
> (Please, make sure to CC me as I'm not on the Community list)
yes, please. and let us know the url.
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist htt
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Please explain why you find this pattern 'repugnant' on a mail list, but
> you don't on a CVS repository.
Since I promised I had finished arguing this, I replied privately.
Joshua.
--
"Brian Behlendorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> It's probably an oversight, nothing more. Drop a message to apmail@
>> (oh heck, I'll CC them in this message right now) and they should be
>> able to set it up. Also community@ should be added to th
Joshua Slive wrote:
Ben Hyde said:
Didn't we settle this most contentious issue some time ago with a few
megabytes of text and a long complex vote coupled with a solid turn
out? If so it's painful and cruel to reopen the issue. - ben
I've already apologized twice for rehashing an old issue, but
> From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 7:30 PM
[...]
> nothing personal, sander. my response would be the same for
> anyone else making that remark.
No problem. I probably should've kept my mouth shut or been
more verbose in my response. An
> sorry, but not only has this been a really bad week for me, but
> i'm bloody well sick and tired of people using this list to
> look back on what they (as a minority) thought was done wrong,
You can make any comment you like this week Ken :) Thanx for warning us..
http://golux.com/coar/blog/ind
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Sander Striker wrote:
> >> 1. The list is, at minimum, terribly misnamed.
> >
> > Yes. It has been a misnomer from the start.
>
> and apparently some members of the minority seem unable to just let
> go and accept and work with the will of the
Sander Striker wrote:
>> 1. The list is, at minimum, terribly misnamed.
>
> Yes. It has been a misnomer from the start.
and apparently some members of the minority seem unable to just let
go and accept and work with the will of the majority, preferring
to snipe any time the opportunity arises.
Joshua Slive wrote:
>
> I will reiterate my arguments, then I'll go away for to save you all the
> pain of my opinions:
better, hold on to your opinions and read the archives as soon
as they're available. *then* give us the pain. :-)
> 1. The list is, at minimum, terribly misnamed. The Apache
um, the decision was to have open archives but subscriber-only
posting, iirc. that makes the list open for viewing as you seem
to be saying it is not, joshua, while also satisfying the people
who don't want it to be *wide* open and allowing drive-by
comments and spam. it is a directed list for as
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Martin van den Bemt wrote:
> There is only one way to change stuff at apache : put it up for a vote.
Actually, my observation is that votes are used extremely rarely. Apache
decisions are almost-always consensus-based. Rare issues do come along
that require votes, but only
"David Reid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > 1. The list is, at minimum, terribly misnamed.
> >
> > Yes. It has been a misnomer from the start.
>
> And that was debated at great (and extremely painful) length on the reorg@
> list before the new list was setup.
In fact, the biggest proponent f
> > Live with it, unsubscribe or put up a vote to have it your way.
> Just stop
> > complaining about it.
>
> No.
>
> Complaining about what we think is wrong -- using reasoned arguments -- is
> the CORRECT way to make changes.
>
There is only one way to change stuff at apache : put it up for a vo
> > > in.
> >
> > Live with it, unsubscribe or put up a vote to have it your way.
> Just stop
> > complaining about it.
>
> Do people actually believe that having a poll will make these issues go
> away???
Nope.. That's why I gave 3 choices..
Mvgr,
Martin
Martin van den Bemt wrote:
And no, allowing "invited guests" does not eliminate either problem.
I'm not sure this is the type of "community" that I want to participate
in.
Live with it, unsubscribe or put up a vote to have it your way. Just stop
complaining about it.
Leave them alone, we need some
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Martin van den Bemt wrote:
> > And no, allowing "invited guests" does not eliminate either problem.
> >
> > I'm not sure this is the type of "community" that I want to participate
> > in.
>
> Live with it, unsubscribe or put up a vote to have it your way. Just stop
> complain
> > And no, allowing "invited guests" does not eliminate either problem.
> >
> > I'm not sure this is the type of "community" that I want to participate
> > in.
>
> Live with it, unsubscribe or put up a vote to have it your way. Just stop
> complaining about it.
Do people actually believe that hav
> > 1. The list is, at minimum, terribly misnamed.
>
> Yes. It has been a misnomer from the start.
And that was debated at great (and extremely painful) length on the reorg@
list before the new list was setup.
Remember the community@ list was supposed to be a cure for many of the ills
that peopl
Joshua Slive wrote:
Ben Hyde said:
Didn't we settle this most contentious issue some time ago with a few
megabytes of text and a long complex vote coupled with a solid turn
out? If so it's painful and cruel to reopen the issue. - ben
I've already apologized twice for rehashing an old issue, but
> And no, allowing "invited guests" does not eliminate either problem.
>
> I'm not sure this is the type of "community" that I want to participate
> in.
Live with it, unsubscribe or put up a vote to have it your way. Just stop
complaining about it.
Mvgr,
Martin
-
> From: Joshua Slive [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 4:27 PM
> Ben Hyde said:
> > Didn't we settle this most contentious issue some time ago with a few
> > megabytes of text and a long complex vote coupled with a solid turn
> > out? If so it's painful and cruel to re
Ben Hyde said:
> Didn't we settle this most contentious issue some time ago with a few
> megabytes of text and a long complex vote coupled with a solid turn
> out? If so it's painful and cruel to reopen the issue. - ben
I've already apologized twice for rehashing an old issue, but that is
obvio
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
It's probably an oversight, nothing more. Drop a message to apmail@
(oh heck, I'll CC them in this message right now) and they should be
able to set it up. Also community@ should be added to the publically
available archives
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> It's probably an oversight, nothing more. Drop a message to apmail@
> (oh heck, I'll CC them in this message right now) and they should be
> able to set it up. Also community@ should be added to the publically
> available archives in http://www.apac
> We're not really trying to hide anything. What you might
> be able to attribute to malice, attribute to, umm,
> absentmindedness.
For the record, malice never occured to me as an option. I'd asked about
archives previously, without a response. So when the comment was ever so
casually made tha
--On Tuesday, January 28, 2003 5:15 PM -0500 "Noel J. Bergman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In the community@ archives you can find the vote on whether this
list should be open or closed.
WHAT archives? As I have commented on before, eyebrowse has none
for community@
(http://nagoya.apache.org/eyeb
Didn't we settle this most contentious issue some time ago with a few
megabytes of text and a long complex vote coupled with a solid turn
out? If so it's painful and cruel to reopen the issue. - ben
> In the community@ archives you can find the vote on whether this list
> should be open or closed.
WHAT archives? As I have commented on before, eyebrowse has none for
community@ (http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/SummarizeList?listId=108).
Are they elsewhere? If so, where?
--- Noel
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Joshua Slive wrote:
> Sorry if this has been discussed before (I just subscribed), but I don't
> understand why community@apache.org would be a closed list. We have
> plenty of other places in the ASF to discuss private issues (board@,
> members@, pmc@, committers@ for anno
Hi Joshua,
in case you are interested in the vote, see below...
As far as I can recall the list was pretty busy at this time and some people worried
about the signal-to-noise ratio while thinking about 650 Apache fellows plus users or as
you put it "having a mechanism to quite people who make noi
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> We did NOT vote to close the list. We voted to limit access to
> committers AND INVITED participants. If Andrew does not wish
> to INVITE Tim's participation, it is _Andrew_ who is blocking Tim's
> access here.
That is not an open list. A country club
Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Sander Striker wrote:
> > community@ is the only ASF wide list that is opt-in and not bound to
> > a certain topic (like infrastructure@ for example). committers@ always
> > reaches _all_ committers if they want to participate or not
Welcome to the minority, Joshua. :)
- Morgan
--- Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Sander Striker wrote:
> > community@ is the only ASF wide list that is
> opt-in and not bound to
> > a certain topic (like infrastructure@ for
> example). committers@ always
> > re
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Sander Striker wrote:
> community@ is the only ASF wide list that is opt-in and not bound to
> a certain topic (like infrastructure@ for example). committers@ always
> reaches _all_ committers if they want to participate or not. So that
> list is not an option.
The fact tha
> From: Joshua Slive [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 10:37 PM
> Sorry if this has been discussed before (I just subscribed), but I don't
> understand why community@apache.org would be a closed list. We have
> plenty of other places in the ASF to discuss private issues
Sorry if this has been discussed before (I just subscribed), but I don't
understand why community@apache.org would be a closed list. We have
plenty of other places in the ASF to discuss private issues (board@,
members@, pmc@, committers@ for announcements, etc). It is hard for me to
think of any
36 matches
Mail list logo
