Hi,
On Thu, 2004-03-04 at 23:27, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> [...] we need to talk [...]
Yes! And you did. Thanks for joining us last evening on #kaffe
(irc.gnu.org). I am really glad that we are communicating now.
> Reasonably, however, you need to acknowledge
> that Arnaud's efforts to work with
Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What's your opinion about setting up pkg-kaffe project and the package
> being in CVS?
Done ;-)
https://alioth.debian.org/mail/?group_id=1205
the cvs will soon be in place...
--
.''`.
: :' :rnaud
`. `'
`-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Hi Ean,
Ean Schuessler wrote:
Hi Dalibor,
I regret that I wasn't at FOSDEM with you, but I was inconveniently in America
at the time. I'll also agree that we haven't had many email discussions but I
do think that every one we have had has been initiated by me. But finger
pointing isn't product
Adam Majer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I really, really think that we need to have some sort of a proper
> process for this type of thing without people getting pissed off. This
> process should also be put in the debian policy; a sort of a virtual
Actually we do have this. You want either Techi
Ean Schuessler wrote:
In any case, I have decided to continue with my maintainership and have an
alarming appetite for flamemail when I've put my mind to something. In the
interest of saving everyone keystrokes I move that we get used to the fact
that I am still the maintainer and talk about mov
lioth make it possible non-dd to join the effort... and two young sexy
hackers already proposed to help... ;-)
if you want to help kaffe in debian, you can join
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Maybe our first step in co-maintaining kaffe could be to resolve the
>> problem with building kaffe on other
Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
>
>> Take an account on Alioth (it'll be the same as your Debian login), drop
>> me a mail when you have your account and I'll add you to pkg-java
>> project.
>
> I have already done this on 15-Jan-2004 and sent Ean a mail about
> it
Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
Take an account on Alioth (it'll be the same as your Debian login), drop
me a mail when you have your account and I'll add you to pkg-java
project.
I have already done this on 15-Jan-2004 and sent Ean a mail about it.
However, I did not get a response.
I propose kaffe to be
is list becomes excessive,
then you can make debian-kaffe, but until that happens, I really think
it might be better to have debian-java the maintainer for Kaffe.
Maybe our first step in co-maintaining kaffe could be to resolve the
problem with building kaffe on other arches. What do you think of
Ean Schuessler wrote:
In any case, I have decided to continue with my maintainership and have an
alarming appetite for flamemail when I've put my mind to something. In the
interest of saving everyone keystrokes I move that we get used to the fact
that I am still the maintainer and talk about mov
elijah wright wrote:
You simply making Arnaud the official maintainer sounds like a good idea.
Several people have mentioned that it is "a nice thing" to leave you as
the maintainer because this is your "last debian package", but i submit
that that *has* to cease to be an issue if you're not going
! I'm not a newbie nor a child, you can trust me! Also, even if
someone make a mistake, it'll be only in the cvs, not in the package.
I hope you'll be responsive. I prefer a mail where you tell 'sorry I
don't have time ATM' than no response at all.
I propose [EMAIL PRO
Hi Dalibor,
I've suspended my discussion of the topic on -devel for the convenience of
other Debianers (many of whom think Java is fat, slow, proprietary and
silly).
I regret that I wasn't at FOSDEM with you, but I was inconveniently in America
at the time. I'll also agree that we haven't had
Hi Mark,
I don't think I've made any attempt to paint my past maintainership as
exemplary or even good for that matter. To have any reasonable discussion,
however, we need to talk about events since I made my request for help with
the Kaffe package.
I know Arnaud has done a lot of good work an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
>
>> Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove
>> > Kaffe from seven architectures with
er <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Co-maintaining Kaffe
> Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:43:52 -0600 (CST)
> Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Arnaud,
>
> You know perfectly well that you are
On Thursday 04 March 2004 14:43, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> When I returned to Dallas on the 25th I spent a day or so catching up with
> work and then prepared a Kaffe 1.1.4 package. When I went to upload this
> package I found, once again, that you had already performed an NMU. You
> knew I was inten
Arnaud,
You know perfectly well that you are distorting the facts. Presumably, you
think that you can escalate this situation to the point that QA will take
Kaffe away from me and make you the maintainer. If that is your strategy,
then fine, but I'll tell you now that it is a stupid and counter
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove
> > Kaffe from seven architectures without consulting me. You made that
> > request to -devel and that request required this respons
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 11:52:06PM +0100, Stefan Gybas wrote:
Subject: Re: Ean, please orphan Kaffe!, was Re: Co-maintaining Kaffe
Please do this.
It is clear that you are not working together productively. Arnaud has
been doing an excellent job with kaffe - it seems he has more time to
spend on
Hi Ean,
Ean Schuessler wrote:
The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove Kaffe
from seven architectures without consulting me. You made that request to
-devel and that request required this response. If you feel foolish then lay
the blame closer to the source.
He con
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, it still seems best to just let the QA team sort things out.
> They should be able to advise you on what else to do if you continue
> to feel that a hijack is justified.
Thanks for your explanations,
Cheers,
--
.''`.
: :' :rnaud
`.
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 01:14:56PM +0100, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> > And 7.4 details how the QA handles orphaning packages maintained by
> > inactive maintainers.
>
> I'd like someone to point me where is the reference of the ITH?! It's
> the second time I read about ITH but I don't know where to s
Hi,
As an up-up-stream maintainer for GNU Classpath, which is used by kaffe
and as a kaffe developer I must say that I find some emails about
maintaining the kaffe package for Debian highly unfair to Arnaud. Arnaud
does all the work on kaffe and communicates with lots of other package
maintainers
Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove
> Kaffe from seven architectures without consulting me. You made that
> request to -devel and that request required this response. If you
> feel foolish then lay the blame closer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I did not find the exact procedure in devref, can you point me somewhere
>> to be the more specific about this, thanks.
>
> 5.9.5 says:
I know this section, I r
Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I did not find the exact procedure in devref, can you point me somewhere
> to be the more specific about this, thanks.
5.9.5 says:
"It is not OK to simply take over a package that you feel is neglected
- that would be package hijacking. You can, of cou
Bob Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stefan Gybas wrote:
>
>> Ean has already stated that Arnaud and Ben should be a co-maintainer
>> of Kaffe in
>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2004/debian-java-200401/msg00086.html. Why
>> should Arnaud not upload if Ean is not responding? Ean should I
Hi.
Since my name has come up in the context of kaffe co-maintainership a
few times now, I figure I might as well clarify my position.
I expect I would have neither the time nor the kaffe-specific expertise
to be a co-maintainer - my main use of kaffe is in testing other
packages under different
Stefan Gybas wrote:
Ean has already stated that Arnaud and Ben should be a co-maintainer of
Kaffe in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2004/debian-java-200401/msg00086.html.
Why should Arnaud not upload if Ean is not responding? Ean should IMHO
not be the "main maintainer" and decide about u
Ean Schuessler wrote:
The last significant change to Kaffe from a *packaging* perspective was
migrating it to DBS and that was my work. Your recent NMUs (which have been
The most significant work on the Kaffe package in the last 12 months was
the move to 1.1. Arnaud has created test packages [1
The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove Kaffe
from seven architectures without consulting me. You made that request to
-devel and that request required this response. If you feel foolish then lay
the blame closer to the source.
The last significant change to Kaffe
Bob Snyder wrote:
Clearly from your email you think Arnaud should be the/a maintainer of
Kaffe. I'm not arguing that point, I just think to make that happen you
need to follow b or c from above, not just make it happen and see if
anyone notices.
Ean has already stated that Arnaud and Ben should
Stefan Gybas wrote:
Ean Schuessler wrote:
That said, I must protest whole-heartedly with the way you are
dealing with me as the maintainer of Kaffe. Performing an NMU that
adds yourself as an Uploader and uses a non-NMU version number is
gross breach of protocol.
I have talked to Arnaud abou
Ean Schuessler wrote:
That said, I must protest whole-heartedly with the way you are dealing with me
as the maintainer of Kaffe. Performing an NMU that adds yourself as an
Uploader and uses a non-NMU version number is gross breach of protocol.
I have talked to Arnaud about the Kaffe package at F
Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
Again, I deeply appreciate your work but I admonish you to follow
procedure or I will take this up with Project leadership.
I do not appreciate the way you deal with the situation. Sending this
mail to the public list before even trying to talk with me is not a way
to p
r package!
> Circumscribe your excitement and go about things in the proper way if
> you wish to work with me on Kaffe. Following the process is an
> integral part of what makes Debian work.
The subject of your mail is 'Co-maintaining Kaffe' but I don't see
nothing concre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi Arnaud,
First, I would like to start by saying how much I appreciate your enthusiasm
and all of the hard work you are putting into Kaffe. I think that your
efforts are definitely producing a better product and I hope that we will be
able to work together t
38 matches
Mail list logo
