Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-20 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 23:44 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: this, then I change my opinion on supporting this proposal, as I surely don't give a damn about some dev meet in the UK that I would never be able to attend and *definitely* don't want that *shoved* down my throat by the tree.

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-20 Thread Stuart Herbert
On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 13:06 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: Huh? I was using it as an example of something that I would not be interested in seeing in *my* tree since I wouldn't ever be able to attend. What did you think I meant by it. Did I at any point say that the UK dev meets are a bad

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-18 Thread Stuart Herbert
Hi Chris, Sorry for the delay in replying. Having a few reliability problems with my broadband atm. On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 08:59 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: I thought your proposal was to get critical information to our users, not force every user to read that $dev is going to be in

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-18 Thread George Prowse
Having organised several Gentoo UK meetings I would like to be advised if anyone has a problem; especially if they dont come or have no idea when, where or what they are. George ProwseOn 11/18/05, Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Chris,Sorry for the delay in replying.Having a few

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-14 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 22:34 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 10:26 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: If users are interested in non-critical information, there's already a mechanism in place for them to get such things. They can join the mailing lists. Do we not already

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-14 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 10:25:33 +0100 Thierry Carrez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:37:15 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | For example, there's no real reason why GLSA's couldn't been delivered | via this at some point (although I'd

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-13 Thread Stuart Herbert
On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 10:26 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: If users are interested in non-critical information, there's already a mechanism in place for them to get such things. They can join the mailing lists. Do we not already have a gentoo-events list? We also have a gentoo-releng list,

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-12 Thread Grobian
Stuart Herbert wrote: On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:22 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: It seems to be your own quest to have the news *only* delivered by portage. I thought I'd been very clear in the email that you've replied to that I support making the news available via other ways. It's the

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-12 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 00:57 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:22 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: It seems to be your own quest to have the news *only* delivered by portage. I thought I'd been very clear in the email that you've replied to that I support making the

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Grobian
On 10-11-2005 21:33:48 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: We need to establish *one* authoritative source of news. We can't do that if we simultaneously launch several sources of news all at once. We have to launch *one* service first, give the userbase time to adjust to that, and then start making

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:19:15 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10-11-2005 21:33:48 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: We need to establish *one* authoritative source of news. We can't do that if we simultaneously launch several sources of news all at once. We have to launch *one*

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Grobian
On 11-11-2005 10:38:43 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: No, the central repository certainly shouldn't be on the web (whatever that means in the first place), it has to be somewhere in CVS (easily accessible by all devs, though not necessarily in a direct way) and should be replicated to as many

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Benno Schulenberg
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Next draft will propose being able to append .read to a filename to mark it read without deleting it. But don't use .read, as it can be understood as both present tense (imperative) and past tense. Better use something like .seen. Benno -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Friday 11 November 2005 00:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:12:28 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Should the GLEP explain how Portage will know how many unread news | items there are in /var/lib/gentoo/news? I couldn't spot where this | is covered in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 21:33 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: My personal conclusion was that there is only one place where we can have any degree of certainty that we have the attention of 100% of the userbase - or as near as damn it. I believe that place is right beneath the message that tells

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 04:52 +0100, Luca Barbato wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:07:37 -0800 Mike Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | What about something like /etc/portage/news.read, which contains a | single news file per line. Perhaps have support for something like |

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 10:38 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:19:15 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10-11-2005 21:33:48 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: We need to establish *one* authoritative source of news. We can't do that if we simultaneously launch several

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 00:58:14 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Feedback from people who have something useful to say would be very much welcomed, assuming of course that they've read the GLEP. Things that I think are generally ok as is: - news item format - news item distribution

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:40:53 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I've already asked a similar question in another mail (in other | context) without an answer, but how many news items do people believe | will exist at any given time? Depending on the actual implementation | it might be

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Grant Goodyear
Marius Mauch wrote: [Fri Nov 11 2005, 11:40:53AM CST] Things that I'd like to be changed/I'm not completely sure about: - filtering of news items: I've already asked a similar question in another mail (in other context) without an answer, but how many news items do people believe will exist

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Stuart Herbert
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:40 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: I've already asked a similar question in another mail (in other context) without an answer, but how many news items do people believe will exist at any given time? We won't know for certain until people start using it. I expect that

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:37:15 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | For example, there's no real reason why GLSA's couldn't been delivered | via this at some point (although I'd prefer a You have X amount of | security fixes to apply type message adding to emerge, and treating | GLSAs as

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 22:37 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: Things that should definitely be changed: - Integration with existing systems: This definitely should be a requirement for the GLEP to be considered final. It doesn't prevent some thing being implemented sooner than others, but

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Stuart Herbert
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:22 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: It seems to be your own quest to have the news *only* delivered by portage. I thought I'd been very clear in the email that you've replied to that I support making the news available via other ways. It's the timing that I'm a bit

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-10 Thread Stuart Herbert
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 21:10 +0100, Grobian wrote: Users don't care about security[1], adminstrators do. Administrators don't care about breaking installations[2], users do. That's the problem with sweeping generalisations they're just too general to be of any value in a discussion. while

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-10 Thread Stuart Herbert
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 00:58 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Feedback from people who have something useful to say would be very much welcomed, assuming of course that they've read the GLEP. Apologies if this has already been picked up by someone else in this monster thread ;-) Should the GLEP

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-10 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:12:28 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Should the GLEP explain how Portage will know how many unread news | items there are in /var/lib/gentoo/news? I couldn't spot where this | is covered in the text, or in the example code. Well, I was going to go with the

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-10 Thread Mike Owen
On 11/10/05, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:12:28 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Should the GLEP explain how Portage will know how many unread news | items there are in /var/lib/gentoo/news? I couldn't spot where this | is covered in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-10 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:07:37 -0800 Mike Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | What about something like /etc/portage/news.read, which contains a | single news file per line. Perhaps have support for something like | =2006-01-01 in order to be able to manually mark date ranges as | read. Eh, yet another

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-10 Thread Luca Barbato
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:07:37 -0800 Mike Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | What about something like /etc/portage/news.read, which contains a | single news file per line. Perhaps have support for something like | =2006-01-01 in order to be able to manually mark date ranges as

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-10 Thread Dan Meltzer
Forever. Gentoo releases mean absolutely nothing, they do absolutely nothing. The news should stay until the upgrade occurs On 11/10/05, Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:07:37 -0800 Mike Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | What about something

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-10 Thread Luca Barbato
Dan Meltzer wrote: Forever. Too long for the not infinite space in the server/mirror Gentoo releases mean absolutely nothing, they do absolutely nothing. Beside adding some profiles, deprecating and removing others, provide an updated installation media... The news should stay until

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Grobian
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 09:56:35PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Then what is the point of this GLEP? Instead, just warn people | through existing intrastructure, which is cheap from an engineering | perspective because everything is already there in place, and don't | think of implementing

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Henrik Brix Andersen
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 11:50:22AM +0100, Paul de Vrieze wrote: What about also allowing the -mm-dd format (with or without hyphens). Using English month names is not the most convenient for many people. I would go as far as suggesting to make it a requirement to use an ISO-8601 compliant

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 09:41:04 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Remember that there are packages in the tree that satisfy the | preemptive requirement, since they simply die when trying to upgrade | and a certain amount of prerequisites is not met. This prevents the | user from losing data

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Grobian
Daniel Ostrow wrote: You are correct, there is no clear cut place for them to go...that's how this thing got started in the first place. However why force users to sign up for something which can't be appropriately filtered (installed packages, keywords, use flags, profiles, etc.) when all of

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Philip Webb
051107 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: 7 Nov 2005 11:50:22 +0100 Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 05 November 2005 01:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: ``Posted:``     Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001). UTC time in ``hh-mm-ss +`` format may also be included.

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 21:10:35 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | It is a well-known fact that removing seemingly useless background | noise can cause relations between problems not to be recognised. | Some users know that and hence would like to see all errata. And, conveniently enough, the

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Jan Kundrát
On Monday 07 of November 2005 21:10 Grobian wrote: Our GLSAs are sent out exactly in the same way, but there is not a word on them in the GLEP, neither does anyone seem to care about them, while they seem to me at least ***VERY*** important, that is, much more important than a message about

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Jan Kundrát
On Monday 07 of November 2005 21:12 Philip Webb wrote: 051107 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: I'm serious -- Gentoo should try to follow international standards -- , but have a (smile) to recognise it's a small point. See the first line of the quotation :-P Cheers, -jkt -- cd /local/pub more beer

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Philip Webb
051107 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: 7 Nov 2005 15:12:20 -0500 Philip Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm serious -- Gentoo should try to follow international standards The format specified in GLEP 1 is an international standard. It's just not the same international standard that you're after. I'm not

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Dan Meltzer
An internation standard that utilizes an international language... hrm On 11/7/05, Philip Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 051107 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: 7 Nov 2005 15:12:20 -0500 Philip Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm serious -- Gentoo should try to follow international standards The format

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-06 Thread Grobian
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Which means you won't be able to satisfy your preemptive | requirement. Not at all. You can warn users repeatedly, but there comes a point when trying to warn them any further becomes futile. Then what is the point of this GLEP? Instead, just warn people through

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-06 Thread Stuart Herbert
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 13:58 +0100, Grobian wrote: A lot Gentoo users I know read gentoo-announce and the GWN. But *many* more don't. That's what we learned from the Apache package refresh, and what we've also learned from the PHP5 work. Works fine for me. What works for you is irrelevant to

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-06 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 09:33:50 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | | Which means you won't be able to satisfy your preemptive | | requirement. | | Not at all. You can warn users repeatedly, but there comes a point | when trying to warn them any further becomes

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Motivation == There are currently several ways of getting news out to our users, none of them particularly effective: This assumes the following ways are really ineffective, something which you don't prove or give any reason for. Hence it's eligable for

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread kloeri
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 11:28:33AM +0100, Grobian wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Motivation == There are currently several ways of getting news out to our users, none of them particularly effective: This assumes the following ways are really ineffective, something which you

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
Jan Kundrát wrote: On Saturday 05 of November 2005 11:28 Grobian wrote: Remember that it is easy to say here that users don't read what's on their consoles as well, as in post emerge messages etc. So make sure you deal with it upfront, why you think now it *will* work. Emerge messages are

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You must not have read the [#forums-whining]_ reference as that makes it quite clear that existing methods isn't adequate. Even if you think the apache maintainers made lots of mistakes you can't really fault us for not trying to get the news of config changes out to all

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Lisa Seelye
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 00:58 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Feedback from people who have something useful to say would be very much welcomed, assuming of course that they've read the GLEP. It is written in the GLEP (Requirements): No user monitoring required It has already been

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Brian Harring
Additional issue/question... On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 12:58:14AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: 6. Portage filters the news item and, if it is relevant, installs it in a special location to be read by a news item reader. Messages are also displayed to inform the user that news is

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread kloeri
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 12:29:28PM +0100, Grobian wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You must not have read the [#forums-whining]_ reference as that makes it quite clear that existing methods isn't adequate. Even if you think the apache maintainers made lots of mistakes you can't really fault us

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Jan Kundrát
On Saturday 05 of November 2005 12:34 Lisa Seelye wrote: The first is the method of delivery: Through 'emerge sync', which requires that users run this on a regular basis to receive relevant news. Further, this process can take a very long time and transfers a relatively large amount of data

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If we were only aiming at a certain group of people there would be no need to change anything. The apache announcements reached lots of users but still left a large chunk of users in the dark. Moving the news to -announce or some RSS feed wouldn't change anything as the

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Jason Stubbs
A more reliable way of getting news of critical updates out to users is required to avoid repeats of the various recent upgrade debacles. Examples of the recent upgrade debacles aren't needed, but you should at least state some of the outcomes that occurred, whether it be unscheduled

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Bryan �stergaard
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 01:58:00PM +0100, Grobian wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I disagree. A lot Gentoo users I know read gentoo-announce and the GWN. For me it works quite well if I see a message with a warning on something. I can quickly find it back if I am in need for it. I

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Brian Harring
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 10:18:14PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: ``Display-If-Installed:`` ?? ?? A dependency atom or simple package name (for example, ?? ?? ``dev-lang/php-5_alpha`` or ``net-www/apache``). If the user has the ?? ?? package specified installed, the news item should be

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Saturday 05 November 2005 22:24, Brian Harring wrote: On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 10:18:14PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: ``Display-If-Installed:``     A dependency atom or simple package name (for example,     ``dev-lang/php-5_alpha`` or ``net-www/apache``). If the user has the    

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
Bryan ��� wrote: Even if you don't realise that this will be a big help for many users or you just don't think those users deserver any help (not sure which one it is tbh) - you might at least consider the fact that only having to push news about major / critical

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 11:28:33 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Preemptive | Users should be told of changes *before* they break the user's | system, after the damage has already been done. | | style suggestion for unambigous interpretation: | perhaps a because if applied afterwards

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 05:24:51 -0600 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Drop the lightweight bit and merge it into multiple delivery. You're | after lightweight _default_, which is fine, but the phrasing is a bit | screwed. Hrm, I don't see those as contradictory. There's a requirement that

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 11:34:23 + Lisa Seelye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The first is the method of delivery: Through 'emerge sync', which | requires that users run this on a regular basis to receive relevant | news. Further, this process can take a very long time and transfers a | relatively

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ferris McCormick
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 11:28:33 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Preemptive | Users should be told of changes *before* they break the user's | system, after the damage has already been done. |

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 17:58:40 + (UTC) Ferris McCormick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I can't resist. I think you mean 'not after system,': | ...*before* they break the user's system, not after Uh oh, I think I finally cracked. Now I'm crazzyyy!!! -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ned Ludd
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 17:53 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 05:43:12 -0600 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Your example readers delete from the news directory, yet I'd expect | that's not going to be desirable for all setups- nor is leaving the | news item in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 14:24:01 -0500 Philip Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | 051105 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | News Item File Format | ... | The news item will be named in the form | ``-mm-dd-item-name.en.txt`` | ... | News Item Headers | ... | Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Brian Harring
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 05:45:35PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | News items may be signed using GPG. If this is done, a detached | signature should be used. | | I'd argue for must be, personally. A bogus news item claiming to be | from portage devs, telling users to change their SYNC

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Philip Webb
051105 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: 5 Nov 2005 14:24:01 -0500 Philip Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 051105 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: News Item File Format ... The news item will be named in the form ``-mm-dd-item-name.en.txt`` ... News Item Headers ... Date of posting, in

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Apart from that this point seems to repeat much of the previous one, | it introduces a new unfounded claim (users do read, but now too late) Read the linked forums thread and all will become clear. the forums thread advocates against the new unfounded claim, IMHO. |

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 17:24:14 -0500 Philip Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Consistency with GLEPs. | | Sorry, that doesn't mean anything: | could you offer something which makes more sense ? GLEP 1 mandates date headers in that format. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Anti-XML,

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 23:32:19 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I was referring to the item-name. It is defined to allow -, whild | the fields are also separated with -. Hence I suggested to allow | _ in the item-name instead of - to avoid (possible) problems when | parsing the field. The

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 14:29:31 -0600 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Signing elsewhere isn't mandatory yet. | | Deal with it ;) In order to deal with it, I'd also have to come up with a solution to distributing keys for Gentoo developers. That's a separate issue which must be addressed

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Sunday 06 November 2005 02:57, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 22:18:14 +0900 Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The following headers are used for filtering. If none of these | headers are specified, the news item is displayed for all users. | Otherwise, the news item is

[gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-04 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
Attached is a substantially reworked draft. I've restructured the whole thing, fleshed it out in places, clarified some parts and incorporated the useful stuff from previous discussions. Note: this is now GLEP 42 as allocated by Grant. AFAIK ChrisWhite's GLEP of the same number never made it to

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-04 Thread Dan Meltzer
``Content-Type:`` Must be ``text/plain``. Mandatory. Why have this header at all then? ``Posted:`` Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001). UTC time in ``hh-mm-ss +`` format may also be included. This field is mandatory. How will prescendse be handled if two

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-04 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 20:44:13 -0500 Dan Meltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | ``Content-Type:`` |Must be ``text/plain``. Mandatory. | | Why have this header at all then? Forwards compatibility. |``Posted:`` |Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001). | UTC time in