Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.15-r3 testing for stable

2006-06-19 Thread Philip Webb
060618 Dan Meltzer wrote:
 On 6/18/06, Philip Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 There is something not quite right about 'testing/stable' as it exists now
 -- no, repeat no, criticism of hardworking developers implied -- :
 might it help everyone if instead we had 'testing/desktop/server' ?
 'testing' = genuinely newly unmasked  awaiting willing users to test;
 'desktop' = generally reliable, but might occasionally trip you up;
 'server' = believed wholly reliable for the most demanding duties.
 You mean GLEP 19?

No.

-- 
,,
SUPPORT ___//___,  Philip Webb : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban  Community Studies
TRANSIT`-O--O---'  University of Toronto
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



[gentoo-dev] GWN Comments

2006-06-19 Thread Caleb Tennis
I'd like to propose some form of ability to post user comments to GWN
stories.  I suppose a full blown CMS system would work, but for the ease
of time I'm suggesting that perhaps we open up a GWN section on the forums
and post the text of the GWN (or perhaps each section) in a new thread
each week and allow users to write comments.  I think opening up this
venue of feedback would let users more readily tell us what they're
interested in, and it would allow GWN contributors/editors/etc to see some
of the fruits of their labors.

Any comments?

Thanks,
Caleb

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 (News) revisited

2006-06-19 Thread Stephen Bennett
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 23:19:10 +0100
Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Since GLEP 42's original author and sponsor has left the project, I've
 taken it over, and would like to have another go at getting it
 implemented. 

OK, since noone has raised any significant issues with this, I'd like
to ask the Council to discuss it at the next opportunity.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] GWN Comments

2006-06-19 Thread Patrick Lauer
On Mon, 2006-06-19 at 07:37 -0400, Caleb Tennis wrote:
 I'd like to propose some form of ability to post user comments to GWN
 stories.  I suppose a full blown CMS system would work,
(Ab)using a blog for that might work

  but for the ease
 of time I'm suggesting that perhaps we open up a GWN section on the forums
 and post the text of the GWN (or perhaps each section) in a new thread
 each week and allow users to write comments.
Sounds like a good idea. 

   I think opening up this
 venue of feedback would let users more readily tell us what they're
 interested in, and it would allow GWN contributors/editors/etc to see some
 of the fruits of their labors.
 
 Any comments?
+1 from me

Patrick
-- 
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Re: [gentoo-dev] strict-aliasing rules, don't break them

2006-06-19 Thread Flammie Pirinen
2006-06-17, Harald van Dijk sanoi, jotta:

 [F]orce LC_ALL=C to make
 that work, unless you want to check for every translation of the
 warning.

You can also check against current locale’s translation of the warning
using gettext(1) or such to extract it.

-- 
Flammie, Gentoo Linux Documentation’s Finnish head translator
and FlameEyes’ bot http://dev.gentoo.org/~flammie.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

2006-06-19 Thread Paul de Vrieze
On Sunday 11 June 2006 13:08, Jan Kundrát wrote:
 Sure, translating GCC output is *not* good, but why don't provide
 localized version of Portage messages like, for example, those when
 Portage complains about unsatisfied dependency?

What about messages output by ebuilds? Are they also going to be 
translated? In that case, how?

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net


pgp8lqeYCol2W.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Alec Warner
Portage currently exports $KV as the current kernel version.  We detect 
this by attempting to mess around with the things in /usr/src/linux 
(.config, make files, etc...)


This is duplicating the superb efforts of the kernel team and of 
linux-info eclass.  As such I would like to deprecate $KV in favor of 
using linux-info eclass.  I don't see the need for portage to export $KV 
into the environment for all packages.


There are a few packages left that use this.  There will be a tracker 
bug shortly.  Mostly this mail is just a heads up ;)

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Georgi Georgiev
maillog: 19/06/2006-11:13:33(+): Alec Warner types
 Portage currently exports $KV as the current kernel version.  We detect 
 this by attempting to mess around with the things in /usr/src/linux 
 (.config, make files, etc...)
 
 This is duplicating the superb efforts of the kernel team and of 
 linux-info eclass.  As such I would like to deprecate $KV in favor of 
 using linux-info eclass.  I don't see the need for portage to export $KV 
 into the environment for all packages.
 
 There are a few packages left that use this.  There will be a tracker 
 bug shortly.  Mostly this mail is just a heads up ;)

But any kind of checks against something in $KERNEL_DIR are just wrong,
wrong, wrong. The only exception being when the ebuild is building
something *against* those sources (kernel modules, and that's it).

It's annoying to have virtual/linux-sources pulled as a dep of gnupg,
iptables or any other package that can do fine without them.

-- 
 /   Georgi Georgiev/ Don't quit now, we might just as well lock  /
\ [EMAIL PROTECTED]\  the door and throw away the key.   \
 / http://www.gg3.net/  / /
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



[gentoo-dev] 1/2 OT: Comprehensive Source Database

2006-06-19 Thread Enrico Weigelt

Hi folks,


I'm currently working on infrastructure for an comprehensive and
detailed source database.

It is not an replacement for freshmeat (which is good software 
index for human users), but an strictly defined database of package 
releases and assigned download URLs along with several meta-data 
(ie. maturity classifications, etc). This database can be queried 
by automated build systems to get download URLs, notify people on 
new releases, etc, etc. Distro/Package maintainers get the benefit 
of being notified properly on each new release and feeding these 
information directly into their buildsystems. 

Once the database is running, I plan to add more data, ie. hotfix
patches or other qm relevant stuff (see my recent announcement 
about my oss-qm project).

The intended audience are package maintainers and self-compiling
people as well as evryone who needs an clean database of packages,
releases and their URLs.


Anyone here interested in joining me ?


cu
-- 
-
 Enrico Weigelt==   metux IT service

  phone: +49 36207 519931 www:   http://www.metux.de/
  fax:   +49 36207 519932 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  cellphone: +49 174 7066481
-
 -- DSL ab 0 Euro. -- statische IP -- UUCP -- Hosting -- Webshops --
-
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Changes to the way Java packages are built

2006-06-19 Thread Duncan
Joshua Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on  Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:46:37 -0500:

 That being said... one of our users has been working on using GCJ to
 this end:
 
 https://projects.gentooexperimental.org/expj/wiki/GCJ_as_a_JDK

Thanks.

 As for why this hasn't been done already or more work isn't being done,
 I believe there are two reasons:
 
 1) We don't have the same restriction as Fedora and Debian do with
 regard to licensing. If we did, then we'd have a more pressing need to
 use 'free' Java implementations to even distribute Java stuff.
 
 2) No one has stepped up with the desire / motivation / skills to make
 it happen. Not only that, but the Java team in generally has been
 understaffed for some time now.

Understood.  As I said, no pressure from me to do it if it's not being
done already.  I just wondered what the status and chances were, thinking
if I was lucky a freedomware config might be one of the choices, and this
answers that to my satisfaction.



-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master.  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

2006-06-19 Thread Jan Kundrát
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
 What about messages output by ebuilds? Are they also going to be 
 translated? In that case, how?

There's no way to provide localized output of einfo/... calls from
ebuild that I'm aware of. Suggestions are welcome :)

Cheers,
-jkt

-- 
cd /local/pub  more beer  /dev/mouth



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Changes to the way Java packages are built

2006-06-19 Thread Duncan
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on  Sun, 18 Jun 2006 13:32:58 -0400:

 May I ask, because I'm very confused, wtf is freedomware?
 
 I can only assume you mean oss/free java?

As distinct from freeware, and also known as Free or Libre Software,
libre being translated free as in freedom (where freeware in common usage
means free as in beer, or sometimes free as in deliberately public domain,
neither one of which is appropriate here), thus libre software ==
libreware == freedomware (and as opposed to slaveryware aka
another-is-your-master-ware, xref the sig).

Some here don't care.  That's fine -- for them.  It's a bit bigger
than that for me, but they don't ask me to run what is to me slaveryware,
and I won't ask them to give up what is to them convenienceware.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master.  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

2006-06-19 Thread Flammie Pirinen
2006-06-19, Jan Kundrát sanoi, jotta:

 Paul de Vrieze wrote:
  What about messages output by ebuilds? Are they also going to be 
  translated? In that case, how?
 
 There's no way to provide localized output of einfo/... calls from
 ebuild that I'm aware of. Suggestions are welcome :)

Is there a reason why calling gettext from einfo() etc. or extracting
messages from tree using e.g. xgettext wouldn’t work?

Apart from technicalities, it does raise number of practical problems
to keep translations up-to-date with live tree as well as making the
messages easier to localise, as with current spliced strings it would
generally be a PITA to do.

-- 
Flammie, Gentoo Linux Documentation’s Finnish head translator
and FlameEyes’ bot http://dev.gentoo.org/~flammie.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Alec Warner

Georgi Georgiev wrote:

maillog: 19/06/2006-11:13:33(+): Alec Warner types

Portage currently exports $KV as the current kernel version.  We detect 
this by attempting to mess around with the things in /usr/src/linux 
(.config, make files, etc...)


This is duplicating the superb efforts of the kernel team and of 
linux-info eclass.  As such I would like to deprecate $KV in favor of 
using linux-info eclass.  I don't see the need for portage to export $KV 
into the environment for all packages.


There are a few packages left that use this.  There will be a tracker 
bug shortly.  Mostly this mail is just a heads up ;)



But any kind of checks against something in $KERNEL_DIR are just wrong,
wrong, wrong. The only exception being when the ebuild is building
something *against* those sources (kernel modules, and that's it).

It's annoying to have virtual/linux-sources pulled as a dep of gnupg,
iptables or any other package that can do fine without them.

In many cases those packages are looking for a specific kernel feature 
to make sure support is enabled for it.


You could argue that in the case where you aren't compiling against the 
kernel that support being enabled isn't critical, but that is a 
discussion you need to have with the package maintainers.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] GWN Comments

2006-06-19 Thread Tobias Klausmann
Hi! 

On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Caleb Tennis wrote:
 I'd like to propose some form of ability to post user comments
 to GWN stories.  I suppose a full blown CMS system would work,
 but for the ease of time I'm suggesting that perhaps we open up
 a GWN section on the forums and post the text of the GWN (or
 perhaps each section) in a new thread each week and allow users
 to write comments.  I think opening up this venue of feedback
 would let users more readily tell us what they're interested
 in, and it would allow GWN contributors/editors/etc to see some
 of the fruits of their labors.
 
 Any comments?

Principally, I agree (though I'd also rather go with the blog
approach as Patrick suggested). One point though: commenting only
being possible after registration may cut down on the spam (both
commercial and vandalism), but it also raises the bar for
legitimate comments. 

I'm not saying there should be no hurdle, it's just that it
should be thought of/decided beforehand.

Regards,
Tobias

-- 
You don't need eyes to see, you need vision.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Changes to the way Java packages are built

2006-06-19 Thread Bob Young

 Some here don't care.  That's fine -- for them.  It's a bit bigger
 than that for me, but they don't ask me to run what is to me slaveryware,
 and I won't ask them to give up what is to them convenienceware.
 


I certaintly support your right to choose such a standard for yourself, however 
I don't think the basic premise that if you use the program, he is your 
master actually has any significance in regards to slaveryware versus 
freedomware, at least as far as most people are concerned. 

The vast majority of average people don't have the skill or in most cases, 
the desire to examine, modify, or understand the inner workings of the software 
they use. 

So whatever it is that makes freedomware free in your opinion, has little 
impact for the vast majority of users. For them it's still someone else who is 
the master of the program. It really makes little difference exactly who that 
some one else is.

 -- 
 Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
 Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
 and if you use the program, he is your master.  Richard Stallman
 

-- 
Regards,
Bob Young
Software Engineer
San Jose, CA.



-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Arek (James Potts)

Alec Warner wrote:

Georgi Georgiev wrote:

maillog: 19/06/2006-11:13:33(+): Alec Warner types

Portage currently exports $KV as the current kernel version.  We 
detect this by attempting to mess around with the things in 
/usr/src/linux (.config, make files, etc...)


This is duplicating the superb efforts of the kernel team and of 
linux-info eclass.  As such I would like to deprecate $KV in favor 
of using linux-info eclass.  I don't see the need for portage to 
export $KV into the environment for all packages.


There are a few packages left that use this.  There will be a 
tracker bug shortly.  Mostly this mail is just a heads up ;)



But any kind of checks against something in $KERNEL_DIR are just wrong,
wrong, wrong. The only exception being when the ebuild is building
something *against* those sources (kernel modules, and that's it).

It's annoying to have virtual/linux-sources pulled as a dep of gnupg,
iptables or any other package that can do fine without them.

In many cases those packages are looking for a specific kernel feature 
to make sure support is enabled for it.


You could argue that in the case where you aren't compiling against 
the kernel that support being enabled isn't critical, but that is a 
discussion you need to have with the package maintainers.
HmmmI don't know about this, since I'm jusr a user without much 
programming experience, and haven't developed anything that makes use of 
kernel features, but If they don't actually build against the kernel, 
couldn't/shouldn't they look at either kernel-headers or the output of 
`uname -r`  (possibly with a way to force the feature on if the user 
knows it's available but the build system isn't detecting it)?


--Arek

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] GWN Comments

2006-06-19 Thread George Prowse

On 19/06/06, Tobias Klausmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Hi!

On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Caleb Tennis wrote:
 I'd like to propose some form of ability to post user comments
 to GWN stories.  I suppose a full blown CMS system would work,
 but for the ease of time I'm suggesting that perhaps we open up
 a GWN section on the forums and post the text of the GWN (or
 perhaps each section) in a new thread each week and allow users
 to write comments.  I think opening up this venue of feedback
 would let users more readily tell us what they're interested
 in, and it would allow GWN contributors/editors/etc to see some
 of the fruits of their labors.

 Any comments?

Principally, I agree (though I'd also rather go with the blog
approach as Patrick suggested). One point though: commenting only
being possible after registration may cut down on the spam (both
commercial and vandalism),


You have to register for a forums as well (usually) and if it were
made part of Gentoo's forums then there would be no need for extra
moderators.


but it also raises the bar for legitimate comments.


Again, the thread system of forums allows for easier viewing of comments.


I'm not saying there should be no hurdle, it's just that it
should be thought of/decided beforehand.

Regards,
Tobias


Personally I think discussions in a wiki get more difficult the longer
the discussion carries on, also i think the ability to get an email
after comments have been made on a thread is a *big* advantage over
the wiki style.

It would be easier to clean up and cut down on vandalism because GWN
contributors and authors could have an ability to moderate said forum
and delete threads once they have been used or discarded.

George
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Ryan Tandy

Arek (James Potts) wrote:
If they don't actually build against the kernel, 
couldn't/shouldn't they look at either kernel-headers or the output of 
`uname -r`?


Kernel headers being the virtual/linux-headers dependency that Georgi 
mentioned.  `uname -r` works, but is annoying because you can't build 
for a kernel other than the one you're running.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes to the way Java packages are built

2006-06-19 Thread Joshua Nichols
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Joshua Nichols wrote:
 = Background =
 
 As some might have noticed, Java 1.5 has been package.masked for some
 time now. There are a number of issues introduced with 1.5 that have
 kept it in package.mask. Please see the Java 1.5 FAQ [1] for more details.
 
 [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/java/tiger-faq.xml
 
 About a year ago, work was begun on improving our part of the build
 system (read: Java related eclasses and our java-config tool) in a way
 to make it much more flexible in general, but specifically improve it to
 get around the known issues. It took about six months to fully develop.
 Unfortunately, the new system was not quite a drop-in replacement. So,
 it took from then until now to determine how to migrate from the current
 system  to the new one in a sane way.
 
 
 = The Current System =
 
 To give some proper background, it is worth going over the current
 system briefly.
 
 == The Java Virtual Machine ==
 Each Java Virtual Machine (VM) installs an environment file into
 /etc/env.d/java. These files contain information about where JAVA_HOME
 is, the PATH to include, etc.
 
 VMs traditionally get installed at /opt/${P}
 
 We have the concept of a 'system' VM and a 'user' VM. The system VM is
 the default VM that will be used for root, and for users who haven't
 selected a user VM. The user VM is, as one might guess, selected on a
 per user basis. It is worth noting that root always uses the system VM,
 and as a result, packages use the system VM when being merged by emerge.
 
 java-config is used to set the system and user VM. When you do so, the
 appropriate file from /etc/env.d/java is copied to/etc/env.d/20java for
 the system VM or to ~/.gentoo/java-env for the user VM.
 
 java-config's notion of the current VM is tied entirely to the
 environment, specifically to JAVA_HOME. Therefore, if you change the
 system VM, you'd need to run env-update and then resource /etc/profile.
 Likewise, changing the user VM involves sourcing ~/.gentoo/java-env.
 
 The fact that you're tied to the environment is annoying, because as
 mentioned, you need re-source the appropriate files. Now imagine you
 have a ton of terminals open... you'd have to source the environment
 files from each one.
 
 == Packages ==
 
 When a Java package is built, information about it is saved in
 /usr/share/${PN}-${SLOT}/package.env (or /usr/share/${PN}/package.env if
 SLOT == 0). In particular, the jars that are associated with the package
 are recorded, as well as which jars from other packages are used.
 java-config can later be used to query for this information.
 
 == Eclasses ==
 
 There are currently 3 eclasses: java, java-pkg, and java-utils.
 
 java.eclass is used for packages which provide a VM.
 java-pkg.eclass is used for most Java packages. It provides tools for
 querying installed jars, and for installing various Java related files.
 java-utils.eclass provides a few utility functions for dealing with Java
 stuff.
 
 = The New System =
 
 == The Java Virtual Machine ==
 In addition to the concept of a system and a user VM, the new system has
 a build VM. As the name implies, the build VM is used for building
 packages (instead of the system VM). Sane defaults are defined on a per
 platform basis at /usr/share/java-config-2/config/jdk-defaults.conf [3].
 The build VM can further be configured by
 /etc/java-config-2/build/jdk.conf [4] .
 
 [3]
 https://svn.gentooexperimental.org/svn/java/java-config-ng/branches/axxo/config/jdk-defaults-x86.conf
 [4]
 https://svn.gentooexperimental.org/svn/java/java-config-ng/branches/axxo/config/jdk.conf
 
 For each Java release (ie 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, etc), you can specify which
 vendor and version to use at build time.
 
 In addition to being installed to /opt/${P}, VMs also now have a symlink
 in /usr/lib/jvm/${PN}-${SLOT}. The purpose of these symlinks is
 explained further down.
 
 The user and system VMs are now represented by symlinks pointing to VMs
 located in /usr/lib/jvm/. The system VM lives at
 /etc/java-config-2/current-system-vm, and the user VM at
 ~/.gentoo/java-config-2/current-user-vm . Additionally, an environment
 variable, GENTOO_VM, can be used to specify the VM used at a given
 instance. GENTOO_VM should be the name of a VM located in /usr/lib/jvm.
 So with regard to what VM is used, first GENTOO_VM is checked, then the
 user VM (for non-root users), and then lastly the system VM.
 
 
 All the trusty java binaries, ie java, javac, javadoc, jar, etc, now get
 wrappers installed into /usr/bin. These are actually symlinks to
 /usr/bin/run-java-tool. This is a script which will figure out which
 tool was invoked, and then determine which VM to used using the method
 mentioned above.
 
 == Packages ==
 
 We now save more information about the build environment at build time
 for each package. This information is saved at
 /usr/share/${PN}-${SLOT}/package.env. This is facilitate troubleshooting
 bugs. Specially, we 

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 05:00:41PM -0700, infowolfe wrote:
 Kernel headers being the virtual/linux-headers dependency that Georgi
 mentioned.  `uname -r` works, but is annoying because you can't build
 for a kernel other than the one you're running.
 Which only applies to kernel modules, not things like gnupg that don't
 REALLY need kernel sources in order to function.
Gnupg builds it's secure memory functionality differently based on what
is available from the kernel. All of the possible APIs are available in
the headers, but depending on what the kernel is configured as, affects
which of the APIs provide secure memory blocks.

With GnuPG, it happens that on older LiveCDs, the kernel that is running
from the LiveCD doesn't offer what it wants, but the one that you would
be rebooting to does.

Could upstream have handled it better? Yes, most definitely. Did they?
No, not yet. We're stuck picking up the pieces.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85


pgpEyOqdURUEi.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] GWN Comments

2006-06-19 Thread Alec Warner
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Tobias Klausmann wrote:
 Hi! 
 
 On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Caleb Tennis wrote:
 I'd like to propose some form of ability to post user comments
 to GWN stories.  I suppose a full blown CMS system would work,
 but for the ease of time I'm suggesting that perhaps we open up
 a GWN section on the forums and post the text of the GWN (or
 perhaps each section) in a new thread each week and allow users
 to write comments.  I think opening up this venue of feedback
 would let users more readily tell us what they're interested
 in, and it would allow GWN contributors/editors/etc to see some
 of the fruits of their labors.

 Any comments?
 
 Principally, I agree (though I'd also rather go with the blog
 approach as Patrick suggested). One point though: commenting only
 being possible after registration may cut down on the spam (both
 commercial and vandalism), but it also raises the bar for
 legitimate comments. 
 
 I'm not saying there should be no hurdle, it's just that it
 should be thought of/decided beforehand.
 
 Regards,
 Tobias
 

CAPTCHA

Registering should be possible but not required :x
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQIVAwUBRJdeR2zglR5RwbyYAQIwCw/+Pmkd2BW3/qdSM00MQvVoMcTzrNdKWIx9
BlJFrviextRgZ5Las7bEoyxmbZC4ikNHPLgdlNUj2G8SrkdOdD1t9dyEV4/+TOWl
YjKx0LaIjefbPL3UtfUZ6Dlrsq/Fp9MQzukjvfGWn4cKDEiLBSFZwOFBYBQT3mMY
CWxyjAC7IVU+twu2VgD8wAhxavJEvxDVnoWT4dEtc4NWLRoWsRqlIj5meamuiGi0
FQsDUo7NZxgClpv3dnhPwC2IDXznN5wQ2BQjbnekObU4T7tNsxKKV2RyzwRvH1h2
I96ohmzny5pqC+pHZ8NMlG0ViD7azgwKgp7mecVhUNwb8yE8T13HGMK8LFPKJiT2
Cr+Q6qsllfXbL4+HH9jfe9K8z42YvEavlALlhNdPxKEL01JnJMylv2jInougbopi
OO7x5iaNxh4+ZIcwY3o5GVK91r1dVWN4171O9TQRNbEFXbInJMuchPZSHr8Ucvfz
tSTPth/V1AV13NG8KPqqWdEecyNJEMw8toKCh+4Y/169QhoZ9Z8Oc8jRvjDK6qJg
Pqa2I0YrjJOGbejJ+UYYYwFp+Ird5XRiPByRu5Qu0zGjHlJN2hKYxEJ3oUyEi86w
tR1aHMQvmH8Vk23Uqtlni3AmqKpa3Z/mUUCf06J9tFs73862rH+6fxSYSB4oPKkX
rtrN+QJQvO8=
=6sbe
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] GWN Comments

2006-06-19 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:00:19 +0200
Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Mon, 2006-06-19 at 07:37 -0400, Caleb Tennis wrote:
  I'd like to propose some form of ability to post user comments to
  GWN stories.  I suppose a full blown CMS system would work,
 (Ab)using a blog for that might work

Should definitely use existing resources, so forums or planet, I think
forums might work better due to a larger userbase, but that's just my
impression (I don't think we have any reliable metric for planet usage).

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature