[Crawling out of hiding again]
-On [20010611 19:30], Andrey A. Chernov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>I agree, but just imagine that I have assumption that Peter already
>resolve this issue with Nick (since he do repo copy) and you'll find
>a reason to not be extra-cautious.
First lesson I learned
Dima Dorfman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (The first URL still exists because the contents of the web site is
> never actually wiped; normally, it's just installed over.) This
> breaks *a lot* of links. Not only within the web site, but external
> links as well. This is, quite franky, unaccepta
"Andrey A. Chernov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 16:33:06 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> >
> > I did the repo copy based on the information I had.. ie: you told me that
> > this had all been discussed and I was left with the distinct impression
>
> I say there that names cha
I'm picking a random message out of the thread to reply to, and as
much as I hate contributing to a flame-war, this issue has not yet
been mentioned.
All the bickering about this not being discussed aside, fixing the
relnotes isn't going to be the end of the story: the web site is
broken. Well,
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 16:33:06 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> I did the repo copy based on the information I had.. ie: you told me that
> this had all been discussed and I was left with the distinct impression
I say there that names change was discussed in i18n
> that this was all settled. If
"Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 09:45:23 -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
>
> > PDT". This was, er, let's see, about *two hours* later?!?
> >=20
> > No wonder no one objected...I bet you were already finished before most=
> =20
> > people read your heads-up message! Did you reali
At 1:18 AM +0400 6/12/01, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
>I understand now. That info you can provide from the beginning
>to minimize messages exchange. I am open to discuss how to fix it.
I think it is probably best to let Bruce Mah figure out why
it has broken, and let him provide the best "immediate
I'm going to respond to exactly one line of your email:
> Fix RELNOTESng affected pathes to new scheme without MFCing
This is the solution I am favoring, pending some discussion with nik.
Please let me deal with it. Thanks.
I am deliberately *not* responding to the remainder of this mess
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 13:35:39 -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
>
> RELNOTESng depends on part of the doc/ tree. Note that doc/ is not
I understand now. That info you can provide from the beginning to minimize
messages exchange. I am open to discuss how to fix it. My suggestions are:
MFC R
If memory serves me right, "Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 11:42:27 -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
> > >=20
> > > Immediate MFC is against our policy, isn't?=3D20
> >=20
> > So is immediate breakage.
>
> Yes, but fixed.
It's still broken.
> It seems that people forget that eve
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 11:42:27 -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
> >
> > Immediate MFC is against our policy, isn't?=20
>
> So is immediate breakage.
Yes, but fixed. It seems that people forget that every big change means
some period to settle down.
> RELNOTESng is broken for RELENG_4. I would hav
If memory serves me right, "Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
> > There would have been less confusion if your heads-up had actually been=
> =20
> > sent with enough advance warning that people would have actually *read*=
> =20
> > it.
>
> I agree, but just imagine that I have assumption that Peter alre
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 21:19:53 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
> Since RELNOTES branched I left to RELNOTES people to decide if they
> want to follow new names policy or not.
I mean, for -stable.
--
Andrey A. Chernov
http://ache.pp.ru/
PGP signature
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 09:45:23 -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
> PDT". This was, er, let's see, about *two hours* later?!?
>
> No wonder no one objected...I bet you were already finished before most
> people read your heads-up message! Did you realistically think that a
> two-hour advance notice
If memory serves me right, "Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 00:51:32 +0900, Motoyuki Konno wrote:
> >
> > o tell Nik about the change.
> >
> >Nik is responsible for doc/ tree.
> >
> > o discussion about "when" we do repo-copy.
> >
> >To minimize the side effect of
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 00:51:32 +0900, Motoyuki Konno wrote:
>
> o tell Nik about the change.
>
>Nik is responsible for doc/ tree.
>
> o discussion about "when" we do repo-copy.
>
>To minimize the side effect of the change, prior announcement
>(at least, to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) a
"Andrey A. Chernov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 22:37:12 +0900, Motoyuki Konno wrote:
> > > 1) Lengthy discussion already happens in -i18n
> > > 2) Repo-copy was done by Peter.
> >
> > We discussed in -i18n ML, but you said NOTHING about doc/ tree.
>
> Renaming is a tech
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 22:37:12 +0900, Motoyuki Konno wrote:
>
> Please take care of 4-stable system.
For that reason currently I don't touch information about i18n names in
localization chapter - a patch needed there notifying that names are
different for FreeBSD 5.x - I plan to produce it lat
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 17:50:43 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 22:37:12 +0900, Motoyuki Konno wrote:
> > > 1) Lengthy discussion already happens in -i18n
> > > 2) Repo-copy was done by Peter.
> >
> > We discussed in -i18n ML, but you said NOTHING about doc/ tree.
>
>
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 22:37:12 +0900, Motoyuki Konno wrote:
> > 1) Lengthy discussion already happens in -i18n
> > 2) Repo-copy was done by Peter.
>
> We discussed in -i18n ML, but you said NOTHING about doc/ tree.
Renaming is a technical question not related to doc. Having both old and
new na
"Andrey A. Chernov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > While I appreciate the sentiment behind your recent commits to doc/, the
> > last time we did a rename like this there was a lengthy discussion prior to
> > the changes, and we did them by repo-copy.
>
> 1) Lengthy discussion already happens i
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 13:04:42 +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
>
> While I appreciate the sentiment behind your recent commits to doc/, the
> last time we did a rename like this there was a lengthy discussion prior to
> the changes, and we did them by repo-copy.
1) Lengthy discussion already happe
22 matches
Mail list logo
