Kumba [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Wed, 06 Jun 2007 00:18:23 -0400:
Ya'll don't hear from me very often, usually because for the last 9
months or so, I've been pretty apathetic to things that have been going
on. But I keep on truckin' because I have
Hi!
As I feel it's necessary to clarify:
I've *not* made the decision to quite or anything, I didn't wnat
to get that notion across in my mail. My point was that it had
gotten so bad that I seriously started considering it - which is
bad enough and made me think.
If that has made half a person
yesterday we discussed about cross development and why the gentoo
support for it works just to a point (and then has something missing)
There are already some convoluted ideas about multiabi/multilib support
with patches being discussed and there are some handy scripts that let
you cross emerge
An excellent former manager of mine once gave me very good advice -
everybody is replaceable. I for one have been a bit annoyed by the
An excellent former manager of yours either was Joseph Stalin or he
just plagiarized this very good advice.
Love,
H
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Kumba wrote:
Anyways, we're off the crab guys. Really. We're pulling in blank pots,
the crew is getting restless, and we're almost out of coffee and
nicotine. Let's get our heads on straight, our asses in gear, fill our
tanks and get back to port so we can get paid and go home.
I wonder
Hi,
I propose to create a new global USE flag:
$ euse -i gsl
global use flags (searching: gsl)
no matching entries found
local use flags (searching: gsl)
[-] gsl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christian Faulhammer wrote:
Hi,
I propose to create a new global USE flag:
$ euse -i gsl
[-] gsl (dev-perl/PDL):
Use the GNU scientific library for calculations
I protest
Michael Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I protest on the grounds that I help maintain PDL, and I'm a
non-conformist, which means no keywords or use flags that might be in
line with conforming to others.
On some occasions I think you sometimes smoke that Gentoo Fungus.
V-Li
signature.asc
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:24:00 +0200
Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PMS overlords what's your take?
You need to start by identifying use cases. Are you discussing handling
cross compiling,
Yes
multilib,
Ok
C++ / python ABIs
Aargh, ehm, should we really
use.local.desc:dev-java/swt:xulrunner - Build native browser integration
against xulrunner
use.local.desc:dev-python/gnome-python-extras:xulrunner - Enable support for
xulrunner instead of firefox
use.local.desc:dev-util/devhelp:xulrunner - Enable support for xulrunner
instead of firefox
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 17:44 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
use.local.desc:dev-java/swt:xulrunner - Build native browser integration
against xulrunner
use.local.desc:dev-python/gnome-python-extras:xulrunner - Enable support for
xulrunner instead of firefox
Chris Gianelloni wrote: [Tue Jun 05 2007, 05:00:28PM CDT]
As a member of the Council, I find it personally offensive that the
Proctors have taken this action on what wasn't even a problem thread.
I'm sick of this. I call for the immediate disbanding of the Proctors.
As much as I dislike
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
be a proctor directive.)
He changed the subject and signed on behalf of gentoo-proctors.
Is there a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked
Agreed from mozilla.
firefox and seamonkey already have the global use-flag
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
be a proctor directive.)
He changed the subject and signed on behalf of
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
could keep your fucking trap shut?
If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure. If I'm told to by
someone on a power trip with a history of
Am Mittwoch 06 Juni 2007 17:42 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
Is there a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked
entirely, as has been suggested?
The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
proctors.
I feel like _anyone_* who willingly acts against a
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 10:29:47AM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote: [Tue Jun 05 2007, 05:00:28PM CDT]
As a member of the Council, I find it personally offensive that the
Proctors have taken this action on what wasn't even a problem thread.
I'm sick of this. I call for
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
could keep your fucking trap shut?
If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure. If I'm told to by
someone on a
Am Mittwoch 06 Juni 2007 17:53 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
could keep your fucking trap shut?
If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure.
On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 05:29:47 PM Grant Goodyear wrote:
[Proctor system]
a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked entirely, as
has been suggested?
Personally, I think we simply don't need the proctors.
I'm sure they have the best intentions but I've never seen any clear
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 18:08:30 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
I'm claiming it because plenty of other people agree. You *did* see the
response that the proctors got
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
be a proctor directive.)
He changed the subject and signed on behalf of gentoo-proctors.
Is there a way to fix the current
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
I'm claiming it because plenty of other people agree. You *did* see the
response that the proctors got from
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:33:29 -0700
Mike Doty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
proctors. Perhaps it should be restaffed with people who aren't so
used to wielding god-like powers on the forums, where anyone who
dares say anything that
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:33:29 -0700
Mike Doty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem is not so much the system as a small number of the
proctors. Perhaps it should be restaffed with people who aren't so
used to wielding god-like powers on the forums, where anyone who
Mike Doty wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
be a proctor directive.)
He changed the subject and signed on behalf of gentoo-proctors.
Is there a way to fix
I noticed that use.desc includes an entry for wxwindows. The
wxWindows project changed its name to wxWidgets around three years
ago. [1] Perhaps the USE flag should be changed to wxwidgets or
simply wx to reflect the change. Beside use.desc and affected
ebuilds, there is also a wxwindows herd.
On Wednesday 06 June 2007 06:10, Ryan Hill wrote:
...to maintain it.
Boa is a single-tasking HTTP server. That means that unlike
traditional Web servers, it does not fork for each incoming connection,
nor does it fork many copies of itself to handle multiple connections.
It internally
Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
I'm sure they have the best intentions but I've never seen any clear
guidelines for them. They use their best judgement what to handle and
what not to but due to language barriers, cultural differences etc. it's
difficult to judge.
The guideline, as far as I understood
On Wednesday 06 June 2007 13:48:53 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
That wasn't what I said. What I said was that the forums staff have no
accountability, and that the proctors were suffering as a result of
containing too many of said forums staff.
That's bullshit. We are subject to the same rules as
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 10:02 -0700, Nathan Smith wrote:
I noticed that use.desc includes an entry for wxwindows. The
wxWindows project changed its name to wxWidgets around three years
ago. [1] Perhaps the USE flag should be changed to wxwidgets or
simply wx to reflect the change. Beside
Hi all,
I am not a dev but a Gentoo-addicted user that would be interested in
getting involved. So I have no more situation awareness than the
website and this ML brought to me. But I have 2 cents I want to share
peacefully.
First, I am wondering about the exact role of what is known to be:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 10:29:47AM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
So, how about using this incident as an opportunity for a calm
discussion about the mandate and role of the proctors? The proctors
clearly felt that they should shut down this thread _before_ things
got out of hand.
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Doty wrote:
Perhaps you should go take a long walk off a short pier.
[snip]
Oh, I'm so hurt. You think I'm a hypocrite. Man, what will I ever do?
Newsflash, I know I'm a hypocrite, which is a lot better than the
childish passive-aggressive
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
got out of hand. Perhaps the goal was laudable, but the methods were
not? (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
be a proctor directive.) Or are people really looking for the proctors
to get involved only when behavior is
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
could keep your fucking trap shut?
If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure. If I'm told to
Hello and welcome to my e-mail,
At this time I would like to encourage you to point your web browser to
http://bugs.gentoo.org and start fixing some bugs. If you have the time
and energy to argue, you have the time and energy to fix some bugs. Stop
acting like you're in kindergarten and start
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Josh Sled wrote:
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
got out of hand. Perhaps the goal was laudable, but the methods were
not? (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
be a proctor directive.) Or are people really
On Sun, 2007-05-27 at 21:02 +0100, Graham Murray wrote:
Ulrich Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would also strongly favor if both gnupg-1 and gnupg-2 could be kept
in different slots.
And maybe an eselect (or similar) to select whether external programs
which call use gpg-1 or gpg-2.
Josh Sled wrote:
I find it disappointing (maybe telling, if one is less charitable) that
the Proctors never censured the original poster for either the tone of the
message, nor the personal invective it contained, and still haven't. I'd
imagine clear violations of the CoC to result in at
drawn in flames.
drown, please excuse my spelling.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:15:45 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No can do, its recess time in a few minutes, and then after that, its
naptime!
Naptime doesn't sound that bad idea. Or a long good sleep.
- Samuli Suominen
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Raúl Porcel wrote:
Agreed from mozilla.
firefox and seamonkey already have the global use-flag
Is there any guideline from mozilla team about what to do when there are
more than one of these flags (firefox/seamonkey/xulrunner) supported by
Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 05:29:47 PM Grant Goodyear wrote:
[Proctor system]
a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked entirely, as
has been suggested?
Personally, I think we simply don't need the proctors.
Nor do I. Every thread that has gone bad in
Hi everyone
I received a book yesterday with the title
producing open source software, written by Karl Fogel.
It's also available online for free: http://producingoss.com/
While reading through the latest messages here I thought that I should
recommend that book (especially chapter 6) to you.
Dnia 06-06-2007, śro o godzinie 18:32 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
napisał(a):
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
I'm claiming it because
Galevsky wrote:
But I do not understand why 7
devs -even elected by the others- could make decisions on other
projects and are described as the group in charge of the 'global
issues and policies'.
The logic is that most organizations are overseen by a board of
directors. This system is used
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anders Hellgren wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
could keep your fucking trap
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 18:10 +0200, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 05:29:47 PM Grant Goodyear wrote:
[Proctor system]
a way to fix the current system, or should it be chucked entirely, as
has been suggested?
Personally, I think we simply don't need the proctors.
As much
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 19:16 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
I'm sure they have the best intentions but I've never seen any clear
guidelines for them. They use their best judgement what to handle and
what not to but due to language barriers, cultural differences etc.
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 14:08 -0300, Mauricio Lima Pilla wrote:
Good luck for the remaining proctors, they will need as they aparently can't
even expect any support from council members.
There's a *BIG* difference between support and blind support. Nobody
ever promised the proctors blind
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 13:14 -0500, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
Great job Chris, way to stick it to them.
Yes. It absolutely *is* a great job that I voiced my opinion in a
manner that I thought was most beneficial for Gentoo. Shame on me for
ever thinking about what might be best for Gentoo.
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 19:16 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
I'm sure they have the best intentions but I've never seen any clear
guidelines for them. They use their best judgement what to handle and
what not to but due to language barriers,
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 01:08 +0100, George Prowse wrote:
from http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/coc.xml
Look at the Council logs from the CoC being approved and the ones since.
We asked for real guidelines so we could specifically avoid this sort of
problem from happening.
--
Chris
Dawid Węgliński wrote:
Dnia 06-06-2007, śro o godzinie 18:32 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
napisał(a):
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just stop claiming others are insane, abusive power-trippers just
because you did not abide by a rule and got your punishment for it.
56 matches
Mail list logo
