Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thursday 15 June 2006 20:17, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: I have to agree that I have never understood the need for the distinction between herd and team. It does not seem to add anything, I guess some people do not like being referred to as a herd may be? It really doesn't bother me. I think of a herd as a collection of developers working on a set of packages kept under the same umbrella due to them being related in some way. Basically a team may manage multiple herds, but still separte them because of organizing reasons. At the days, the kde team herded three herds: QT, kde-core, and kde-others. This allowed for example kde-others (random kde apps) to receive different attention than core kde applications. If people really do feel the need to distinguish these things then fine - document it. Otherwise I will continue operating the way I do. I don't see why it matters so much... I agree that in most cases team=herd and there is not formal project and it really doesn't matter if you say that a herd maintains something when it's the herd's maintainers that do so. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net pgpsbU2gYwd9O.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thursday 15 June 2006 08:59, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd, with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the maintainers of all packages in the herd. this would be useful regardless This should be only those people mentioned (or referred to) in the herds.xml file. Not maintainers of individual packages. The list of these people can be glanced from the web version of herds.xml. The stylesheet resolves all indirect references. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net pgpW4hC13baOU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thursday 15 June 2006 12:34, Jakub Moc wrote: Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: I don't know if this is a really unpopular viewpoint, but for a lot of stuff I maintain I put myself as maintainer and the herd I am acting as part of in herd. My intention there is to say primarily I am taking care of this and have taken responsibility but if I disappear, am slow or someone else just wants to bump it etc in that herd then they are also free to do so. Well yeah, that's how I read the metadata.xml in such cases... but since some people are suggesting that herd is not relevant info wrt maintainership, this attempt for clarification has been proposed. May be it would be more correct for me to add the herd alias as a second maintainer? I think it is good for people to take responsibility for what they add to the tree and that is my intention there... :=) If a general consent is (games left apart ;) that herd is a backup for cases when maintainer is unavailable/goes MIA, and a primary maintainer if there's no maintainer tag in metadata.xml, let's just leave it at that, be done with it and save ourselves the hassle... If we can't agree upon this, then we probably should stick herd alias into maintainer tag when that herd _is_ actually willing to act as a maintainer. The whole point of the herd tag is to say that the herd with that name is responsible when the maintainer fails. Herds are NOT maintainers, and the email must not be referred to in a maintainer tag. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net pgpbap1RBELOT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 00:26 -0500, Lance Albertson wrote: Alec Warner wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? How exactly does one go about maintaining our developers? ;) developers maintaining $foo == those developers that are maintainers of $foo, imho ;) Blésmrt, -jkt -- cd /local/pub more beer /dev/mouth signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Sat, 2006-06-17 at 12:55 +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote: Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 00:26 -0500, Lance Albertson wrote: Alec Warner wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? How exactly does one go about maintaining our developers? ;) developers maintaining $foo == those developers that are maintainers of $foo, imho ;) Ah damn, and here I nearly got excited. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Saturday 17 June 2006 04:51, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: How exactly does one go about maintaining our developers? ;) It's devrel's cursed job. Ask them. :) Carsten pgpDHDEmEDUMI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 17 Jun 2006, Carsten Lohrke wrote: On Saturday 17 June 2006 04:51, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: How exactly does one go about maintaining our developers? ;) It's devrel's cursed job. Ask them. :) Carsten Um, whips and chains. But we're nice about it. :) Regards, Ferris - -- Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Developer, Gentoo Linux (Devrel, Sparc) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFElAsdQa6M3+I///cRAkw9AKCuLkwdVENA8Hy++xBOS76PLGPXywCfW977 N0yvQEPZNYLlpqlau54M18c= =lWhc -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Sat, 2006-06-17 at 14:00 +, Ferris McCormick wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 17 Jun 2006, Carsten Lohrke wrote: On Saturday 17 June 2006 04:51, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: How exactly does one go about maintaining our developers? ;) It's devrel's cursed job. Ask them. :) Carsten Um, whips and chains. But we're nice about it. :) *grin* That's more what I was hoping for ;) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 00:26 -0500, Lance Albertson wrote: Alec Warner wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? How exactly does one go about maintaining our developers? ;) I suggest we create a murder of developers! Then we can be cool and not suck! :-) And hundreds of crows just flew past my eyes. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? We could be boring and change herd to packagegroup. We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd, with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the maintainers of all packages in the herd. The list could include project aliases and/or individuals. Then bug-wranglers can assign to the relevant herd alias if no maintainer is listed in metadata, and let the herd maintainers re-assign amongst themselves if appropriate. -- Kevin F. Quinn signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd, with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the maintainers of all packages in the herd. this would be useful regardless -mike pgpNaJsppizDH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd, with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the maintainers of all packages in the herd. this would be useful regardless -mike Two notes here: - same name as herd requirement doesn't work for stuff like cron/mysql/postgresql/apache... i.e., system accounts. - needs to be done tree-wide (for packages that have metadata.xml at least :P - ebuilds w/o metadata is topic for another thread). Until it's completed, it's not useful - you still cannot rely upon the assumption that if herd alias ain't in maintainer, they don't maintain the thing. Otherwise yeah, +1 - and it's already done this way in many ebuilds, i.e., the herd alias is in maintainer as well. -- jakub signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:57:21 +0200 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd, with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the maintainers of all packages in the herd. this would be useful regardless -mike Two notes here: - same name as herd requirement doesn't work for stuff like cron/mysql/postgresql/apache... i.e., system accounts. Herd aliases could be named herd-name, perhaps. - needs to be done tree-wide (for packages that have metadata.xml at least :P - ebuilds w/o metadata is topic for another thread). Until it's completed, it's not useful - you still cannot rely upon the assumption that if herd alias ain't in maintainer, they don't maintain the thing. Otherwise yeah, +1 - and it's already done this way in many ebuilds, i.e., the herd alias is in maintainer as well. -- Kevin F. Quinn signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: I don't know if this is a really unpopular viewpoint, but for a lot of stuff I maintain I put myself as maintainer and the herd I am acting as part of in herd. My intention there is to say primarily I am taking care of this and have taken responsibility but if I disappear, am slow or someone else just wants to bump it etc in that herd then they are also free to do so. Well yeah, that's how I read the metadata.xml in such cases... but since some people are suggesting that herd is not relevant info wrt maintainership, this attempt for clarification has been proposed. May be it would be more correct for me to add the herd alias as a second maintainer? I think it is good for people to take responsibility for what they add to the tree and that is my intention there... :=) If a general consent is (games left apart ;) that herd is a backup for cases when maintainer is unavailable/goes MIA, and a primary maintainer if there's no maintainer tag in metadata.xml, let's just leave it at that, be done with it and save ourselves the hassle... If we can't agree upon this, then we probably should stick herd alias into maintainer tag when that herd _is_ actually willing to act as a maintainer. More clear now? :) -- jakub signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
Kevin F. Quinn wrote: - same name as herd requirement doesn't work for stuff like cron/mysql/postgresql/apache... i.e., system accounts. Herd aliases could be named herd-name, perhaps. Current practice for these aliases is herd-bugs in most of the cases. Examples - apache-bugs, php-bugs, cron-bugs, mysql-bugs, pgsql-bugs (grrr, this one's inconsistent :P)... Probably best to stick w/ that, I'd say. -- jakub signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On 6/15/06, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? Herds are fine ... just seems to be some differing ideas about how they are managed. That's inevitable, given our collective reluctance to clearly document stuff like that. My shiny new idea is to carry on with herds :P Best regards, Stu -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:34:42PM +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: :=) If a general consent is (games left apart ;) that herd is a backup for cases when maintainer is unavailable/goes MIA, and a primary maintainer if there's no maintainer tag in metadata.xml, let's just leave it at that, be done with it and save ourselves the hassle... WORKSFORME Regards, Brix -- Henrik Brix Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd pgpbuLf36F4b9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On 15/06/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? We could be boring and change herd to packagegroup.--Kevin F. QuinnMaybe that would stop everyone treating eachother like cattle?George
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 02:59 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd, with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the maintainers of all packages in the herd. this would be useful regardless This is *generally* the case now, except in cases where there already is a system user that has the same name as a herd. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 12:34 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: I don't know if this is a really unpopular viewpoint, but for a lot of stuff I maintain I put myself as maintainer and the herd I am acting as part of in herd. My intention there is to say primarily I am taking care of this and have taken responsibility but if I disappear, am slow or someone else just wants to bump it etc in that herd then they are also free to do so. Well yeah, that's how I read the metadata.xml in such cases... but since some people are suggesting that herd is not relevant info wrt maintainership, this attempt for clarification has been proposed. *sigh* Who said that? I have not seen that said, *at all* in this thread. What I *have* seen said is that whomever *maintains* the herd is the package's maintainer, except in the case where an explicit maintainer is listed. In almost all of the cases, this is the same email alias as the name of the herd. When you assign bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] it isn't because the people on the alias are a part of the games herd, it is because the people on the alias *maintain* the games herd. It is a subtle distinction, and one that actually doesn't change your practices, since you've already been doing everything correctly this entire time. An example of this *not* being the case is apache. You still give the apache bugs to the right people, right? Of course you do, because apache-bugs is listed as the maintainer. May be it would be more correct for me to add the herd alias as a second maintainer? I think it is good for people to take responsibility for what they add to the tree and that is my intention there... :=) If a general consent is (games left apart ;) that herd is a backup for cases when maintainer is unavailable/goes MIA, and a primary maintainer if there's no maintainer tag in metadata.xml, let's just leave it at that, be done with it and save ourselves the hassle... Why is it that you are restating *exactly* what I am saying, but then trying to pretend like I'm not saying what you are saying? The games team has nothing to do with this, because I am saying that we work *exactly* as you expect us to. What I am saying is that the *herd* is a collection of packages. The email alias associated with the herd, goes to *people* not packages. The alias could have any number of people, or other aliases, as its contacts. I guess I need to spell this out so there's no more ambiguity. A package belongs to a herd. The herd is listed in metadata.xml, like it should be. If there is nobody listed in maintainer explicitly, you email the alias associated with the herd. This email goes to the *maintainers* not the *herd*, since the maintainers are people, and the herd is packages. Each herd has *at least* one maintaining project, team, or group of people responsible for it. If we can't agree upon this, then we probably should stick herd alias into maintainer tag when that herd _is_ actually willing to act as a maintainer. More clear now? :) No. You've gone and changed the practices we have in place now to make it more complicated. Say it with me. Herd == packages Team == people Good. Now say This requires me to make no changes to how I operate. Very good. Somebody give this man a cookie! -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group | packages and maintaining developers? Herds the way they operate in practice are fine. The issue is the old metastructure definition, which a) encourages dumping packages upon herds that don't want them and b) means you can't say assign it to the vim herd. Which is rather annoying, because in practice the people that maintain a particular herd call themselves a herd, and the team / herd distinction is not usually made. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thursday 15 June 2006 09:04, George Prowse wrote: On 15/06/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? We could be boring and change herd to packagegroup. Maybe that would stop everyone treating eachother like cattle? are you just afraid of the farmer in the middle of the nite ? -mike pgpJBvQ2ZZAQ7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
Chris Gianelloni wrote: *sigh* Indeed... No. You've gone and changed the practices we have in place now to make it more complicated. No, I didn't. If games herd wants any game dumped onto games herd, then do it. Most other people probably don't want unknown stuff dumped on them. Say it with me. Herd == packages Team == people There's no such thing like team in metadata.xml, that's what we've been talking about for ~1 day now. Good. Now say This requires me to make no changes to how I operate. Very good. No, this requires that people don't dump packages on others without their consent. That what we've been talking about for ~1day now. Somebody give this man a cookie! I prefer beer, thanks. ;) -- jakub signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 15 June 2006 09:04, George Prowse wrote: On 15/06/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? We could be boring and change herd to packagegroup. Maybe that would stop everyone treating eachother like cattle? are you just afraid of the farmer in the middle of the nite ? -mike Wouldn't you be afraid if I walked up to you in the middle of the night? :-) -- Lance Albertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager --- GPG Public Key: http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742 ramereth/irc.freenode.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thursday 15 June 2006 00:31, Alec Warner wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? As Mike says: they work just fine for me -- Sandro (sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thursday 15 June 2006 14:56, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group | packages and maintaining developers? Herds the way they operate in practice are fine. The issue is the old metastructure definition, which a) encourages dumping packages upon herds that don't want them and b) means you can't say assign it to the vim herd. Which is rather annoying, because in practice the people that maintain a particular herd call themselves a herd, and the team / herd distinction is not usually made. I have to agree that I have never understood the need for the distinction between herd and team. It does not seem to add anything, I guess some people do not like being referred to as a herd may be? It really doesn't bother me. I think of a herd as a collection of developers working on a set of packages kept under the same umbrella due to them being related in some way. If people really do feel the need to distinguish these things then fine - document it. Otherwise I will continue operating the way I do. I don't see why it matters so much... pgpQ8jLlCIzMh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 17:43 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: Say it with me. Herd == packages Team == people There's no such thing like team in metadata.xml, that's what we've been talking about for ~1 day now. Maybe it's what you erroneously have been trying to say that I've been saying, but it definitely isn't what we have been talking about. The team is *implied* by the herd. If you email the alias for the herd, you get the team. It really is that simple. Once again - the team is *only* implied by the herd if the team does _agree_ that the particular package in question should belong to the herd. If they don't, they it implies nothing. So, what we have been talking about is that you shouldn't encourage people to stick something into herd, like herdperl/herd just because it's perl app (or to restate what you've mentioned, to stick herdgames/herd there just because it's a game. People won't like it, so don't force you games team practice on others, it's not how that mostly works outside of games herd/team. To quote ciaranm, since I obviously can't express myself the way you could understand: quote The issue is the old metastructure definition, which a) encourages dumping packages upon herds that don't want them and b) means you can't say assign it to the vim herd. Which is rather annoying, because in practice the people that maintain a particular herd call themselves a herd, and the team / herd distinction is not usually made. /quote Let's look at this another way. There are a few packages which belong to the livecd herd. There is no livecd team, there is just me. The only person on the herd alias for livecd is me. That doesn't make *me* the livecd herd. It makes the *packages* the livecd herd and *me* the *maintainer*. And again, what's this distinction good for? Well, it's useless unless you are trying to enforce something like what you've suggested here before, i.e. quote I see nothing wrong with listing perl as the herd, *only* if they have themselves as the maintainer. /quote Well of course it's wrong b/c people that don't give a damn about the thing you've just dumped on them will get the bugs! And will need to either remove themselves from metadata.xml or if they don't do it, will finally end up maintaining the thing once the guy who's kindly dumped it on them went MIA/retired. -- jakub signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 20:43 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: And again, what's this distinction good for? Well, it's useless unless you are trying to enforce something like what you've suggested here before, i.e. quote I see nothing wrong with listing perl as the herd, *only* if they have themselves as the maintainer. /quote Well of course it's wrong b/c people that don't give a damn about the thing you've just dumped on them will get the bugs! And will need to either remove themselves from metadata.xml or if they don't do it, will finally end up maintaining the thing once the guy who's kindly dumped it on them went MIA/retired. No offense, but that's just insane. See, one of the problems that we have now is the massive amount of unmaintained crap in the tree. Half of this stuff, we don't even *realize* is unmaintained until a security bug comes along. Wouldn't it be much nicer if, for example, there were a perl app, and the maintainer went MIA and someone actually *knew* about it? I'm sorry, but the arguments you are presenting go against the idea of what herds were designed to solve, packages with a single maintainer and the maintainer disappearing. If the package is no-herd and only lists a maintainer, then the maintainer goes MIA, we end up with yet another unmaintained piece of junk in the tree. If it is listed as perl or games or livecd or whatever, then somebody (hopefully) knows about it, and can take action, such as: a) finding a maintainer, b) deciding to maintain it themselves, or c) removing it from the tree after a last rites email. I mean, what next, we start pissing on trees to mark our territory? A game is a game is a game. Not adding it to the games herd doesn't change what it is any more than not adding livecd-tools to the livecd herd changes it being something used for a livecd. I would much rather see something like sunrise (but not necessarily sunrise itself) used to put packages which are no longer maintained, but were once in the tree. I guess I'm just a proponent of solving the problems we already have, rather than making new ones. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:22:31 -0400 Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would much rather see something like sunrise (but not necessarily sunrise itself) used to put packages which are no longer maintained, but were once in the tree. sunset.overlays.g.o :) -- Kevin F. Quinn signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 22:01 +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:22:31 -0400 Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would much rather see something like sunrise (but not necessarily sunrise itself) used to put packages which are no longer maintained, but were once in the tree. sunset.overlays.g.o :) HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! That's a great name for it. So who's on board? :P -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
Alec Warner wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? I suggest we create a murder of developers! Then we can be cool and not suck! :-) /me goes back into lurking mode -- Lance Albertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager --- GPG Public Key: http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742 ramereth/irc.freenode.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
On Thursday 15 June 2006 00:31, Alec Warner wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers? they work just fine for me -mike pgpyOk8hXaUzk.pgp Description: PGP signature
