Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 01:10:48AM +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: > Christian Hartmann napsal(a): > >> The paludis news item has been approved by me, cause I rock, and > >> commited to the proper location. > > > > Council? > > +1 > > This should be put on hold until there's some consent and guidelines

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

Christian Hartmann napsal(a): >> The paludis news item has been approved by me, cause I rock, and >> commited to the proper location. > > Council? +1 This should be put on hold until there's some consent and guidelines on how this is supposed to be used. The current 100+ emails threads clearly s

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

> The paludis news item has been approved by me, cause I rock, and > commited to the proper location. Council? -- Christian Hartmann http://www.gentoo.org/~ian/ PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x2154E5EE692A4865 Key fingerprint = 4544 EC0C BAE4 216F 5981 7F95 2154 E5

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

On Sat, 5 May 2007 17:27:45 -0500 »Q« <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you aren't, you won't see the news item. > > I saw it when it was posted here. Because the GLEP 42 process, quite rightly, requires that news items be posted to -dev for review before they're committed. > It seems important

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

On Sun, 6 May 2007 00:30:28 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > No, but it affects the impact upon user experience, which is the > > entire point of the process. This is, after all, about delivering > > what's best for affected users. > No it is not. > It is about wether or

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

I picked a random mail to reply to: The paludis news item has been approved by me, cause I rock, and commited to the proper location. Assuming the code Zac wrote was actually tested and is turned on, the news item will hit the tree soon. Good Day Sirs. -Alec -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > No, but it affects the impact upon user experience, which is the entire > point of the process. This is, after all, about delivering what's best > for affected users. No it is not. It is about wether or not this news item would fit into the current set of rules, which it w

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

On Sun, 06 May 2007 00:09:37 +0200 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a): > > On Sat, 5 May 2007 23:48:31 +0200 > > Maurice van der Pot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:26:50PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > >>> and who knows what news item deli

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a): > On Sat, 5 May 2007 23:48:31 +0200 > Maurice van der Pot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:26:50PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>> and who knows what news item delivery looks like? >> Irrelevant, what it looks like has nothing to do with whether

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

On Sat, 5 May 2007 23:48:31 +0200 Maurice van der Pot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:26:50PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > Are you a Paludis user who thinks that > > Irrelevant, people can think beyond just paludis. We're discussing a news item that will only be show

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:26:50PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Are you a Paludis user who thinks that Irrelevant, people can think beyond just paludis. > and who knows what news item delivery looks like? Irrelevant, what it looks like has nothing to do with whether or not it is critical.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

On Sat, 5 May 2007 16:10:39 -0500 »Q« <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In , > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I bet there are other users around, who think a config file format > > change that doesnt break anything but produce warnings in the first > > place is non-critical. > > I

[gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

To be honest I didn't expect so many comments here and as far as I believe in your sincerest intentions... err no I don't anymore. We have got input about this from many users and we have some experience in dealing with users "problems" in the past and we really know better what information pal

[gentoo-dev] Re: [news-item] Paludis 0.24

Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 05 May 2007 00:17:46 +0100: > On Fri, 04 May 2007 17:38:43 -0500 > Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Right which... seems to me something I would want to know *BEFORE* >> I upgraded... > > N