Anders Hellgren wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Stuart Herbert wrote:
On 6/23/06, Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm amazingly confused about why technical policy decisions (and even
discussions about them) are being made by devrel in a devrel-specific
channel. Could someone clear
Jakub Moc wrote:
Anders Hellgren wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Stuart Herbert wrote:
On 6/23/06, Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm amazingly confused about why technical policy decisions (and even
discussions about them) are being made by devrel in a devrel-specific
channel.
First of all, I'm not sure why devrel was involved in a technical
decision without actually having all the interested parties there, but
aside from that, when Gentoo developers become a bunch of 5 year olds?
What is this absolute nonsense of you don't like my toy, you can't have
your toy going on
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
First of all, I'm not sure why devrel was involved in a technical
decision without actually having all the interested parties there, but
aside from that, when Gentoo developers become a bunch of 5 year olds?
Not sure either, maybe brix will be able to answer your
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
This childishness from *all* sides is getting really old, really fast.
People need to grow the hell up, and quit with the melodrama.
+1 (with gusto!)
--
Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 08:43:23AM -0400, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
First of all, I'm not sure why devrel was involved in a technical
decision without actually having all the interested parties there, but
aside from that, when Gentoo developers become a bunch of 5 year olds?
What is this
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
First of all, I'm not sure why devrel was involved in a technical
decision without actually having all the interested parties there, but
aside from that, when Gentoo developers become a bunch of 5 year olds?
What is this absolute nonsense of you don't like my toy, you
This was originally supposed to go into another thread, but hey - this is a
perfect illustration of what I am going to talk about (to unconfuse Seemant
right away - this is not related to your posting but rather to the situation
that lead to it). I really was considering sending this as a
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:09:24 +0200 Harald van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| You're suggesting jakub maybe shouldn't even be a Gentoo dev because
| he *doesn't* give one unofficial overlay special treatment over
| another?
One unofficial project that has screwed up so badly that the council
has
Joshua Nichols wrote:
Umm maybe it's just to early in the morning, but I don't see
anything in the logs regarding using bugzilla for overlays not on
overlays.gentoo.org. I only see references to sunrise specifically, not
a blanket statement for all non-overlays.gentoo.org overlays
Or
Alec Warner wrote:
I believe that jakub finds this devrel decision a step out of bounds
(not sure if anyone else detected the that in his statement) and saying
that to the java folks is moreso a way of pointing out just how silly it
is :) I mean if he was serious, he would have addressed the
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 03:27:53PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:09:24 +0200 Harald van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| You're suggesting jakub maybe shouldn't even be a Gentoo dev because
| he *doesn't* give one unofficial overlay special treatment over
| another?
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 15:09 +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote:
You're suggesting jakub maybe shouldn't even be a Gentoo dev because he
*doesn't* give one unofficial overlay special treatment over another?
The jave unofficial overlay is well on its way to becoming an official
and officially hosted
Also, just so I'm clear on my stance on this:
I don't care one whit about whether those keywords are used in bugzilla
or not. Keywords are a way to help bugzilla users use bugzilla. As for
perceptions about it -- as long sunrise is clear on their pages that
they are absolutely not official as
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 11:11:15AM -0400, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 15:09 +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote:
You're suggesting jakub maybe shouldn't even be a Gentoo dev because he
*doesn't* give one unofficial overlay special treatment over another?
The jave unofficial
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Alec Warner wrote:
I believe that jakub finds this devrel decision a step out of bounds
(not sure if anyone else detected the that in his statement) and saying
that to the java folks is moreso a way of pointing out just how silly it
is :) I mean if he was serious, he
Executive summary:
There is a (by now) well established knowledge on group dynamics depending on
its size, involving parameters such as Dubnar's number for example. Two
references I spotted just recently (well, Ok, they are from 2004 actually :))
can be found below:
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 01:33:21PM -0400, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 18:07 +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote:
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 11:11:15AM -0400, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 15:09 +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote:
You're suggesting jakub maybe shouldn't even
18 matches
Mail list logo
