Aron Griffis wrote:
Alin Nastac wrote: [Sun Sep 11 2005, 05:02:27PM EDT]
Gentoo history is full of such individuals who only want to be sure
that they could become devs but are not willing to put any effort
behind it.
Gentoo's history is full of hard-working devs.
The slackers are
On Monday 12 September 2005 02:25, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
If you're not up for having your code reviewed, don't contribute to an
open source project. No-one expects you to produce perfect code
straight off (at least, we don't until we give you commit access). We
*do* expect you to be prepared
12.9.2005, 16:03:17, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Many users seem to think that a WONTFIX is non-negotiable. I tend to agree
with them, for the most part. Rather than WONTFIX them, simply tell them that
they won't be included as-is. WONTFIX gives the user the impression that we
are not
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 10:03:17AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Many users seem to think
that a WONTFIX is non-negotiable. I tend to agree with them, for the
most part. Rather than WONTFIX them, simply tell them that they won't
be included as-is. WONTFIX gives the user the impression that
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 16:28 +0200, Maurice van der Pot wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 10:03:17AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Many users seem to think
that a WONTFIX is non-negotiable. I tend to agree with them, for the
most part. Rather than WONTFIX them, simply tell them that they
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 18:12 +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 11:41 -0400, Peter Hyman wrote:
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 16:28 +0200, Maurice van der Pot wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 10:03:17AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Many users seem to think
that a WONTFIX is
Peter Hyman wrote:
1) what IS the status of svyatogor and lanius?
I don't know if they are active or not, but you can always try to
*unofficially* check when did they last committed something to CVS -
[1], [2].
[1] http://cia.navi.cx/stats/author/svyatogor
[2]
I think you need to rethink that. Notifying a maintainer that there is
an update or new add on to an existing project is not really getting
involved. It's HELPING. I realize that maintainers cannot stay on top of
all 120,000 packages. That's where the everyday users come in. They,
selfishly,
On Monday 12 September 2005 19:03, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
The easiest way to improve those ebuilds' chances
of getting into the tree is by getting them up to a good enough
standard that whoever picks them up is very unlikely to have to do
major extra work on them.
To have even more
12.9.2005, 19:32:32, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
To have even more unmaintained packages in the tree. The tree it is that
needs QA. If maintainer-wanted bugs stay open forever - who cares.
[left for later reference]
Thanks for the pointer. :p So from the user point of view it's better to file
a
On Monday 12 September 2005 19:56, Jakub Moc wrote:
Since you said above, that you really don't care if those user-submitted
ebuilds will ever get into portage or will stay in maintainer-wanted queue
forever and that's the stuff in portage that actually matters QA-wise, I'm
missing why are you
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 20:53:26 +0200 Carsten Lohrke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Monday 12 September 2005 19:56, Jakub Moc wrote:
| 1. The biggest share of maintenance isn't getting an ebuild right,
| but the ongoing effort keeping it up to date, applying patches,
| interact with upstream
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
And as for taking it as a PISSOFF... We've had exactly one person do
that so far. All the rest of the feedback we receive -- which is a heck
of a lot -- is of the thanks for the pointers, please could someone
check this
Several core ROX programs are out of date.
Rox bug # 102228
Rox-lib bug # 79333
Rox-clib bug # 78309
Despite the above bug reports, and copies to the current listed
maintainers, the products are not being updated.
Rox is among the easiest programs to maintain, and many ebuilds simply
need to
On Sun, 2005-09-11 at 17:50 +0200, Maurice van der Pot wrote:
If bugs are not handled in a timely manner, it is because we're
shorthanded. This is also the reason new ebuilds are often assigned to
maintainer-wanted. We'd rather not add packages to portage if there is
no developer to pick up
On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 12:42:11PM -0400, Peter Hyman wrote:
Certainly, I am others have fulfilled this. I have emailed the two
maintainers offering to assist. No response.
I can't speak for them. If they're non-responsive and you want to become
a developer, contact the recruiters.
For some
Peter Hyman wrote:
Firstly; to be asked to become a developer you should either apply to an
opening, or just help out whether in the form of user support or filing
bug reports - we notice frequent contributors making contributions to
Gentoo and we attempt to reward them by giving them the chance
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 00:02 +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
snip...
Indeed, your name is everywhere when it comes down to rox thing. Because
your dedication on rox subject, I am willing to help you become a dev,
but I need to be sure you are not going to dissapear in the very next
moment.
Gentoo
Alin Nastac wrote: [Sun Sep 11 2005, 05:02:27PM EDT]
Gentoo history is full of such individuals who only want to be sure
that they could become devs but are not willing to put any effort
behind it.
Gentoo's history is full of hard-working devs.
The slackers are simply forgotten. ;-)
Thank you for the opportunity. Apparently though, my submissions have
already been rejected Ciaran. It's important to realize that the
submissions were intended to AID the developers, not to necessarily be
PERFECT in every way.
Of course they have been criticized by Ciaran. In case you didn't
On Sun, 2005-09-11 at 20:27 -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
Thank you for the opportunity. Apparently though, my submissions have
already been rejected Ciaran. It's important to realize that the
submissions were intended to AID the developers, not to necessarily be
PERFECT in every way.
21 matches
Mail list logo
