On 02:00 Thu 05 Jun , Łukasz Damentko wrote:
Hi guys,
Nominations for the Gentoo Council 2008/2009 are open now and will be
open for the next two weeks (until 23:59 UTC, 18/06/2008).
I want to nominate:
1. Marijn Schouten (hkBst)
2. Ulrich Müller (ulm)
--
Panagiotis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
| On 02:00 Thu 05 Jun , Łukasz Damentko wrote:
| Hi guys,
|
| Nominations for the Gentoo Council 2008/2009 are open now and will be
| open for the next two weeks (until 23:59 UTC, 18/06/2008).
|
| I want to
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
I want to nominate:
1. Marijn Schouten (hkBst)
2. Ulrich Müller (ulm)
I accept.
Ulrich
pgp4Cl437iZ97.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 05:24:34AM +, Josh Glover (jmglov) wrote:
LICENSE=Intel
Check configure output, GPL-2 license is enabled if v4l and/or xine USE
flags are on.
SLOT=0
KEYWORDS=~x86
IUSE=ffmpeg gtk ieee1394 python swig v4l v4l2 xine
DEPEND=
dev-util/pkgconfig
With the code
On Sat, 2008-06-07 at 14:46 +0100, Alex Howells wrote:
I agree with both of these and also think both agaffney and wolf31o2
would serve us excellently on Council. Consider them nominated too :)
Thanks, but I no longer have the time nor the desire to dedicate to the
Council.
--
Chris
Although he has been nominated already and thus declined I would still
like amne to change his mind and run for council again.
George
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 07:50:01AM +0200, ??ukasz Damentko wrote:
Robin H. Johnsonrobbat2
Nope, I won't be running this time around.
I've got a lot more done in the past year that I wasn't a council member
than the preceding year when I was.
I think tsunam and
I think tsunam and kingtaco are the same, but I'll wait for them to make
those statements themselves.
While I thank those who nominated me, as in past years I've declined the
nomination in favor of working on other possibilities. I wish those who
are running the best of luck.
So yes I decline
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Łukasz Damentko wrote:
Zac Medico zmedico
Thank you for the nomination. However, I will decline because there
other things that I would prefer to focus on.
Zac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 22:18:19 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote:
libogg and popt are now masked, and they'll wait a bit before return
to ~arch that way.
2 months later, any news on this ? I've been using the unmasked
versions so long; are we going to wait forever ? It's
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 11:14 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
But some EAPI-0 accepting Portage versions don't accept inline
comments. Using inline comments in the tree will break those Portage
versions.
Yes, and EAPI=0 accepting Portage versions also didn't accept things
like package.use and
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 11:22 +0100, David Leverton wrote:
PS: An example of something in PMS that is different from Portage:
inline comments are disallowed. The only reason I can think for
doing
this is to not make Paludis change it's behaviour.
Fortunately you don't have to think, you
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 12:22 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
David Leverton wrote:
On Friday 13 June 2008 11:10:46 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Interesting to note, however, that Paludis doesn't accept inline
comments, and this behaviour predates PMS.
There's a reason for Paludis not accepting
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 11:23 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Did you check whether Portage that's included in current Gentoo
releases supports inline comments in profiles?
Yeah, the version in 2008.0_beta2 surely does. Perhaps you meant
something else? Well, either that, or you're just posting
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 11:27 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Well, then it should be updated to match current Portage behaviour.
PMS is not supposed to document How portage worked at one point of
time or The intersection of the capabilities of Portage and
Paludis. It should follow the current
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 12:44 +, Duncan wrote:
Ciaran's right on this one. It may have been a bug in portage, now
fixed, but at least until a stable current release media set, a working
PMS can't change the EAPI-0 definition to fail with portage on the old
release media, however stale it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello.
The nominations for the Gentoo Council 2008 election were closed at
23:59:59 UTC June 18th, 2008. The voting for the new council will begin
at 00:00 UTC June 21st, 2008 and will end at 23:59:59 UTC July 4th.
There were 36 nominees to the
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 15:50 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Do you think that the differences between the proportion of patches
from 'Paludis people' that are accepted or rejected and the proportion
of patches from 'Portage people' or 'Pkgcore people' indicates a
problem?
Nope. What I see as
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 16:04 +0100, David Leverton wrote:
On Sunday 15 June 2008 15:42:28 Peter Volkov wrote:
For example, currently, PMS team does not include anybody from portage
team - official PM team and thus this team can't represent Gentoo
interests.
The Portage team is perfectly
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 15:09 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:55:29 +0200
Santiago M. Mola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As discussed in bug #222721, portage has changed the execution order
of phases. It seems the change was introduced in portage-2.1.5 and it
makes that, when
Chris++
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 15:50 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Do you think that the differences between the proportion of patches
from 'Paludis people' that are accepted or rejected and the proportion
of
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:29:07 +0200
Christian Faulhammer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gentoo Arch Testing Tool: URL:http://gatt.sourceforge.net/ for all
arch workers and testers.
I call SPAM! (Now keyworded ~hppa.)
Kind regards,
JeR
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:21:24 -0700
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that everything these days is an EAPI scope change. That's
not very useful for Gentoo, considering it's been quite some time
since PMS was proposed and we've not seen approval for either EAPI=0
or EAPI=1
++
It's about time someone said this and I honestly think that lots of
developers will be thinking the same.
In the end, PMS is just a way for them to spread their own agenda and
force it on both the developers and the users so maybe it would be best
for all if paludis and it's developers
On Thursday 19 June 2008 04:09:26 George Prowse wrote:
In the end, PMS is just a way for them to spread their own agenda
Lies and FUD.
maybe it would be best for all if paludis and it's developers were to
concentrate on making paludis for a different distro. Trollix may be a
good place to
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:21:24 -0700
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 15:09 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:55:29 +0200
Santiago M. Mola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As discussed in bug #222721, portage has changed the execution
order of
On Thursday 19 June 2008 01:23:33 Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Considering that the most recent official release is 2008.0_beta2, I
don't see where you have a point, at all.
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/releng/#doc_chap5
The latest release of Gentoo Linux is:
Gentoo Linux 2007.0 for Alpha, AMD64,
On Thursday 19 June 2008 02:21:24 Chris Gianelloni wrote:
It seems that everything these days is an EAPI scope change.
Everything change that has the potential to break existing packages, or to
make new packages incompatible with existing package managers, is an EAPI
scope change. That is the
28 matches
Mail list logo
