On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 11:05:01 +0100, Ingo Juergensmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When Joerg Jaspert is already doing the dirty daily work, why does James
still needs in place then? (Except he just stays in that position for a
transitional period until Joerg is taking over that task and job
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:01:07AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 11:05:01 +0100, Ingo Juergensmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When Joerg Jaspert is already doing the dirty daily work, why does James
still needs in place then? (Except he just stays in that position for a
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:59:29PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Please note that year 2005 has come to an end and
the year 2005 is now - even in my mail address!
Does the new address bring with it a more constructive attitude towards
volunteers who have contributed countless hours over
Ingo Juergensmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:59:29PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Does the new address bring with it a more constructive attitude towards
volunteers who have contributed countless hours over the years to keeping
this project running, or should I plan to
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 06:39:23AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Does the new address bring with it a more constructive attitude towards
volunteers who have contributed countless hours over the years to keeping
this project running, or should I plan to killfile this one as well?
So you
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 07:30:32AM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:59:29PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Please note that year 2005 has come to an end and
the year 2005 is now - even in my mail address!
Does the new address bring with it a more constructive
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 12:06:53AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Please note that year 2005 has come to an end and
the year 2005 is now - even in my mail address!
Does the new address bring with it a more constructive attitude towards
volunteers who have contributed countless
On Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:42 AM, Ingo Juergensmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Regarding James Troup...
[...]
I still believe that it would be better for the project when he would
retire from
some of his many positions, because he's too loaded with them.
I'm assuming you haven't spotted
* Ingo Juergensmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050105 07:35]:
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:59:29PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Please note that year 2005 has come to an end and
the year 2005 is now - even in my mail address!
Does the new address bring with it a more constructive attitude
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:42:00AM -, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:42 AM, Ingo Juergensmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Regarding James Troup...
[...]
I still believe that it would be better for the project when he would
retire from
some of his many
On Wednesday, January 05, 2005 10:05 AM, Ingo Juergensmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
When Joerg Jaspert is already doing the dirty daily work, why does
James still needs in place then? (Except he just stays in that
position for a transitional period until Joerg is taking over that
task
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 10:59:31AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
I don't understand why you try to make as many developers opposed to you
as possible.
I don't try it, it's not my intention, but I say what I mean and think. Of
course this is sometimes not the same with what the audience might
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:42:52AM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 12:06:53AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
The us versus them pitting of volunteer contributions against each other
appears to be your game alone, and is precisely the sort of thing that led
me to
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 12:15:43PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Ohno, it's not my game, trust me. I've better things to do than playing such
a game. Maybe I'm the one who complains most loudly, but there are DDs that
agree with me in some (sometimes most or all) points,
Yes, there are
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 01:06:49PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 12:15:43PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I've tried to defend you for some time, because I thought your past help
to the m68k port should not have gone unnoticed. I stopped doing so when
I realised
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 01:11:49PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
And now you joined the other side? Attacking instead of defending? Does that
help the m68k port better? I doubt that seriously.
I'm not attacking anyone.
Usually this is what attackers believe. The attacked party feels
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 08:28:59AM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
Unless you're a FPAV fan, please don't Cc: me.
I just press g to reply to list mails. Other people (like Steve) are
capable of configuring their MUAs in that way that they don't get CCs. Maybe
you doing something wrong then?
On Wednesday 05 January 2005 02:05 am, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
When Joerg Jaspert is already doing the dirty daily work, why does James
still needs in place then? (Except he just stays in that position for a
transitional period until Joerg is taking over that task and job
completely. I would
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 10:18:21AM -, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wednesday, January 05, 2005 10:05 AM, Ingo Juergensmann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
When Joerg Jaspert is already doing the dirty daily work, why does
James still needs in place then? (Except he just stays in that
Le mardi 21 décembre 2004 à 12:18 +0100, Ingo Juergensmann a écrit :
FWIW: With your attitude and persistent accusations you're driving
away even those who partially agree with you.
Sure, that's a risk.
That's not a risk, that's a reality. Now that you spat your flames on
this thread, I
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:22:41PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mardi 21 décembre 2004 à 12:18 +0100, Ingo Juergensmann a écrit :
FWIW: With your attitude and persistent accusations you're driving
away even those who partially agree with you.
Sure, that's a risk.
That's not a risk,
Ingo Juergensmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want answers, mail me your questions privately. BTW: the questions I
asked within the thread are still unanswered as well. :)
If you can't play politely, other people will not be inclined to play
with you. Your continued abuse of volunteers,
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 09:55:21PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
If you want answers, mail me your questions privately. BTW: the questions I
asked within the thread are still unanswered as well. :)
If you can't play politely, other people will not be inclined to play
with you. Your
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:38:03PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
Please note that year 2005 has come to an end and
the year 2005 is now - even in my mail address!
Does the new address bring with it a more constructive attitude towards
volunteers who have contributed countless hours over
24 matches
Mail list logo
