erm, and how exactly do you propose that the user who
doesn't-read-the-site-because-it-has-no-useful-information-currently
will learn about errata.g.o?
On 11/3/05, Nathan L. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > Not necessar
For simple translations? No.
For translations that span the same bredth (old version checking is
probably going to be fairly needed if we used xml as a main version,
and all other pretifying stuff is necessary.
On 11/4/05, Jan Kundrát <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 04 of November 2005 19:
>``Content-Type:``
> Must be ``text/plain``. Mandatory.
Why have this header at all then?
> ``Posted:``
> Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001). UTC time in
> ``hh-mm-ss +`` format may also be included. This field is mandatory.
How will prescendse be handled if
this can be found in the docs at http://www.gentoo.org/doc/
On 11/5/05, Armindo Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I am member of LUG, and we are interested in becoming a Gentoo Mirror!
> We are wanting to know info about system requirements and
> configuration.
>
> Cumps
>
> Armindo Silva
I suppose my only question is, why can't examples be inlined at the
bottom of the glep, and simply use a in document link to reference
them?
On 11/7/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, this is a change to the GLEP process, so it itself needs to be a
> GLEP... All it does is propos
An internation standard that utilizes an international language... hrm
On 11/7/05, Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 051107 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > 7 Nov 2005 15:12:20 -0500 Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I'm serious -- Gentoo should try to follow international standards
> >
Okay, it works according to my useless opinion :)
On 11/7/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 19:34:44 -0500 Dan Meltzer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | I suppose my only question is, why can't examples be inlined at the
> | bottom of
Forever.
Gentoo releases mean absolutely nothing, they do absolutely nothing.
The news should stay until the upgrade occurs
On 11/10/05, Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:07:37 -0800 Mike Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > | What about s
One usually adapts to unforseen problems, not ones that are known
going into the project.
Your suggestion is akin to buying a car that you know has bad tires, a
bad alternator, a rusted body, and sundry other things wrong with it
for full price, and just planning on fixing when it actually breaks.
On 11/16/05, Zou, Yixiong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to create a gentoo package for some internal software. I
> followed
> several Howtos online and created the ebuild file for my package. But
> somehow
> ebuild always return me the same error over and over again:
>
> $ ebui
I've been running my latest install with features=test, makes it
simple to test packages requiring stablizization and all that... at
least partially..
However, I've seen a few packages that fetch stuff during the test
phase from the internet, which seems like a _really_ bad idea to me.
For 1, wh
As an AT... albiet a very busy/cannot help as much as I'd like one...
The only useful thing I see in here is ro-cvs access. This
facilitates testing by allowing the tester to get the ebuilds as they
are committed, instead of syncing and hoping not to get banned from
rsync servers.
I could care l
Read the log before commenting. Along with the email containing the log
It explains what occurred fairly well, oddly enough.
On 11/18/05, Corey Shields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 18 November 2005 08:31 pm, Lance Albertson wrote:
> > No, thats not entirely true. It was submitted a few
On 11/19/05, Kurt Lieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 05:06:15PM + or thereabouts, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> > For instance, the way GLEP 41 suggests doing r/o cvs is not going to work.
>
> So, in the interests of trying to find a solution to this particular
> problem...
>
>
On 11/19/05, Kurt Lieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 05:44:41PM -0500 or thereabouts, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > Funy, I was just pondering that myself... is authenticated rsync
> > really possible?
>
> Yes, it has its own auth mechanism.
at?
On 11/19/05, Kurt Lieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 05:44:41PM -0500 or thereabouts, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > Funy, I was just pondering that myself... is authenticated rsync
> > really possible?
>
> Yes, it has its own auth mechanism.
Personally, I do not think the tree is the place for anything besides
that which relates to the tree. I really do not think users would
appreciate there sync being burdoned by "Developer x broke his toe
this week" ; "developer y is going to italy" ; "We recently recieved 3
new mirrors" and have al
BSD is dead jokes are dead.
Lets move on to the next thing!
Developers working on bsd are dead! SHortest development time ever thunder!
oh, and who let ferringb write the intro's, needs more verbosity
WHens Gentoo/Opensolaris coming? /me hides
On 11/20/05, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
On 11/22/05, R Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 16:26 +0100, Marc Hildebrand wrote:
> >> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> >> [..]
> >>> Now, on the topic of the tarballs.
> >>>
> >>> Give me one example of something that you can do with a stage1 or stage2
On 11/23/05, Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marius Mauch posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> excerpted below, on Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:40:49 +0100:
>
> > On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 03:39:08 -0700
> > Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Here's the proposal again. If there's an issue with it, shoot it
forgot my sarcasm tags :)
Get the idea though?
On 11/23/05, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 23.11.2005, 20:07:15, Dan Meltzer wrote:
>
>
> > Can we get all current developers renamed to nick.developer then? just
> > to alleiviate any confusion someone may
On 11/23/05, Mike Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/22/05, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Give me one example of something that you can do with a stage1 or stage2
> > tarball that you cannot with a stage3 tarball.
> >
>
> I may not be the typical user, but I use Stage1 to bui
On 11/23/05, Mike Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/23/05, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/23/05, Mike Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I may not be the typical user, but I use Stage1 to build servers,
> > > because I can fit
On 11/26/05, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ned Ludd wrote:
> > Good afternoon,
> >
> > Would you be willing to give up space in $ROOT/usr/lib/debug for ELF
> > executables by default in order to aid in better debugging by or do we
> > want to only emit it when a FEATURE= is defined.
> >
On 11/27/05, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 27 November 2005 00:10, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > It's great!
> > Make it a FEATURE default on for common profiles.
> +1, and it would be better if the FEATURES, instead of removing the generated
> files, would disable the
Random thought May be completely off base.
Could this debug info be NFS shared? assuming like computers, or would
it be different on each computer.
On 11/27/05, Tavis Ormandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 12:50:30PM -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > I'm in favor of it enabled
bugs.gentoo.org
http://dev.gentoo.org/~plasmaroo/devmanual/
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/ebuild-submit.xml
not gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
On 12/10/05, Herbert Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A great software that would be fun to have on Gentoo is texmaker.
>
> http://www.xm1math.net/
Gcc has also moved to subversion...
On 12/10/05, Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 11 December 2005 00:56, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > svn so far was good but I don't know which big projects had it deployed.
>
> KDE uses subversion, depending on what you call big of course.
>
> --
> J
On 12/10/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 23:49:59 + Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | current agenda:
> | none ?!
>
> How about a decision on what's to be done to fix the GLEP 41 mess?
glep 41 was approved... people ranted, it fell off the maps
Point of Clarity,
> and the ``mysql-5`` database format changes.
These changes actually occured in mysql 4.1, not mysql-5
On 12/10/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Main changes since the previous edition:
>
> * File format tweaks.
>
> * Changes to the way relevance headers work
On 12/11/05, Wernfried Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 01:35:50AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Although most package updates are clean and require little user action,
> > occasionally an upgrade requires user intervention during the upgrade
> > process.
> > Recent ex
If everyone but infra was in favor of glep 41, are you saying it
should be approved?
On 12/12/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 11:15:43 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | A GLEP should list whom has been solicited and provide evidence that
> |
>Internationalisable
> Being able to provide messages in multiple languages may be beneficial.
Not quite sure, is it required for GLEP's to be in american English or
is UK English fine?
Pointing at Internationalizable
On 12/12/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, new draft. Cha
case may it be sent to
-core instead"
On 12/12/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:30:52 -0500 Dan Meltzer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | >Internationalisable
> | > Being able to provide messages in multiple languages may b
Well, it would be changing Glep 1... which probably needs an ammendatory GLEP
On 12/13/05, Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Ciaran McCreesh schrieb:
> | | Proposed change:
> | |
> | | ``Posted:``
> | | Date of posting, in ``-m
Whoops, sending to the list is a good idea
-- Forwarded message --
From: Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:51:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Changes to date format of current GLEPs
To: Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nope, but the changes further on.
http://viewcvstest.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0001.html?rev=1.8&view=log
meh, when it comes down to it... isn't this good enough of a change log?
On 12/13/05, Olivier Crete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-13-12 at 21:09 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On
Here, have a goat.
It's on me
no, literally, get it off!
On 12/16/05, Jeffrey Forman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To all,
>
> After blowing my upgrade window by almost 2 hours bugzilla is back up,
> albeit missing the pretty Gentoo theme. I will be putting that in after
> I've taken a break, beca
Why not $(portageq newsdir) ? Currently, that would return only the
one for main tree, but if/whenever multi repo support it added, it
could return a space delimted list. This makes it simple to manage,
and lets the portage crew
a) figure out what they want to do
b) implement it while keeping thi
On 12/16/05, Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > | Brian agreed with you that the extended dep syntax will be necessary
> > | at some point in the future. I also agree. So, knowing that glep 42
> > | doesn't require extended depset syntax, can we stop playing this g
http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/xorg-x11/migrating_to_modular_x_howto.txt
followed it this morning :)
On 12/23/05, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 03:40:57PM -0700, Joshua Baergen wrote:
> > As many of you no doubt have noticed, spyderous and I finished bumping
> > th
On 12/24/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:56:37 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want
> | it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem
> | it sane/ready
On 12/24/05, Curtis Napier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > On 12/24/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:56:37 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>wrote:
> >>| It'
On 12/26/05, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 13:59, Simon Stelling wrote:
> > > Actually "stricter", and there are way too many people to put that in
> > > without knowing what that do... or is it a default nowadays, I'm not even
> > > sure.
> > You
and my bad.
I am not yet awake.
It died cause of runpaths on strict, it just showed both, and I wasn't
thinking when I sent earlier email...
On 12/26/05, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/26/05, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On 12/26/05, Lares Moreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 00:59 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:45:00 +0100 Stefan Schweizer
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > | That will increase the sync time for all of our users - can we please
> > | keep this info ou
On 12/26/05, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 08:12:03PM -0500, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > On 12/26/05, Lares Moreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 00:59 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2
On 12/29/05, Jory A. Pratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Unless there are any major objections tomorrow night I will commit
> mozextension.eclass to the tree. You can find mozextension.eclass at
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~anarchy/eclass . You
On 12/30/05, Stefan Schweizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/30/05, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 12/29/05, Jory A. Pratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> &
Here are my random two cents
On 1/5/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 19:57 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 03:58:57AM +, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 01:17:06PM -0500 or thereabouts, Chris Gianelloni
> > > wrote:
> >
On 1/9/06, Mark Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Subject line:
> A New Linux Way
Learn to send emails correctly?
>
> Text as follows:
>
> Hello fellow Linux Users!
>
> We here at SaviourLinux.com desire to create a united universal way.
> Please visit the website for more information, but h
On 1/15/06, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> this topic has come up before too many times and has yet to be solved, and we
> have too many hacks in place
>
> the issues:
> - USE=debug is way too vague; sometimes it builds different code (i.e.
> additional runtime checks, debugging output
On 1/19/06, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lares Moreau wrote:
> > Could you post updates once a week(or two), similar to what [EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]
> > does with the aging ebuilds. I don't feel a play-by-play is necessary.
>
> I will be posting daily updates until it goes into ~arc
On 1/25/06, Mikey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 January 2006 19:13, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
>
> > Ahh, so you were the idiot that ran those tests. Congratulations...you
> > needlessly did a --emptytree world after you had already done
> > --emptrytree system in order to bloat your
What eactly is your point? Of course they are.
On 1/26/06, Mikey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 26 January 2006 08:06, Chris Gianelloni spammed:
> > On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 20:23 -0600, Mikey wrote:
> > > If you actually downloaded a "pristine" stage1 or a stage3 tarball you
> > > might no
On 2/10/06, Klaus-J. Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am new to this list, but I am not new to Gentoo.
>
> Would you please discuss a GLEP draft, which I believe it might improve
> the usability of Gentoo?
>
> Text at:
>
> http://www.seismic.de/gentoo/gentoo_mask_proposal.html
Seems lik
On 2/28/06, Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 17:38 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Sheesh, you'll probably claim that this isn't broken next too:
> >
> > if [ "${IS_UPGRADE}" = "1" ] ; then
> > einfo "Removing old version ${REMOVE_PKG}"
> >
> >
On 2/28/06, Renat Lumpau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 04:31:37PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > today's lesson: proactive QA is frowned upon, it's only a bug when a user
> > files a report at bugs.gentoo.org
>
> I don't think that's the lesson. It oughtta be: we need a way
Asking developers to "proxy" takes almost as much time as it does to
ask them to maintain a package by themselves. The developer is
directly responsible for anything he commits, so he will have to still
test the ebuild, still test any revisions, and still follow the
package to make sure there are
On 3/23/06, Daniel Goller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 09:15 -0500, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > Asking developers to "proxy" takes almost as much time as it does to
> > ask them to maintain a package by themselves.
>
> wrong
>
> >
On 5/18/06, Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The package sys-apps/paludis is in the wrong category. It is a package
manager on par with rpm, dpkg, etc. Those live in app-arch.
Therefore I propose to move the paludis package to app-arch.
It is not a system package at all. It does not e
A secondary package manager is a package manager that instead of
directly aiming
at replacing portage as primary package manager.
What does it do instead?
The first restriction is that no packages in the tree must rely on
the secondary
package manager. While packages may provide a leve
On 6/10/06, Markus Ullmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Okay, so after figuring out open problems (thanks to kloeri and various
other people for help here), we now have a resolution that should
satisfy all involved parties here. This should adress dostrow's demands
as well.
1) m-w / m-n requiremen
On 6/14/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 22:34 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
> > It's not irrelevant; you're just not reading it properly. You might
> > notice that metadata.xml contains tags other than , like, say,
> > . In the example that sparked this, is games
On 6/18/06, Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
060618 Roy Marples wrote:
> On Sunday 18 June 2006 17:12, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Sunday 18 June 2006 04:32, Philip Webb wrote:
>>> I suspect most users wb happy to see packages stabilised a bit sooner,
>>> even if they're only 95 % reliabl
On 6/20/06, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
[snip]
I don't see how any other suggestion is simpler than mine for developers
or users. Maybe I missed something in skimming the discussion.
To summarize:
- USE=qt enables support for the most current qt
On 6/21/06, Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Caleb Tennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below,
on Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:03:21 -0400:
> [Stefan Schweizer wrote...]
>> qt3 - enable optional qt3 support
>> qt4 - enable optional qt4 support
>
> Maybe I just need a little
On 6/22/06, Graham Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There's a newer way to control the same thing that userlocales controlled,
> but I didn't understand it when it was posted here.
Though, AFAIK, there is no way of retaining the old behaviour, of
building
On 6/27/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK, guys, I was speaking with vapier earlier about the possibility of
getting gcc 4.1.1 stable for the 2006.1 release. We've managed to build
some release media with it, and are planning on doing more testing with
it. What we really need i
On 7/30/06, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sunday 30 July 2006 18:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Personally I'd expect the council to block the thing permanently.
hard to address any sort of concerns here, so i guess i'll just regurgitate
the council log to you
it's hard for users t
On 7/31/06, foser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello dear followers,
tonight after a some deliberation I have decided to step down as gnome
lead in favor of AllanonJL. As far as I am concerned AllanonJL has been
the acting lead for quite a while now, while I was too busy to devote
much time to Gen
On 9/2/06, Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/2/06, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Give us about 3000 more developers, and sure* ;)
I don't think that that's good thing to be saying to our users.
Is it a bad thing to be saying to your developers?
We didn't need 3000 mor
On 9/2/06, Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/2/06, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/2/06, Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 9/2/06, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Give us about 3000 more developer
On 10/5/06, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Peter Weber wrote:
> You don't unterstand me, sorry.
> There is no Universal-CD, a User must to download the LiveCD which
> forces he/she to use the Ncurses/X11-Installer, because there is no
> Stage3-Tarball.
OH RLY? Maybe just read the options y
On 10/20/06, Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Just a random thought that popped into my head:
We could have a commit fest where everyone who wants to compete kicks in
some small amount of money(say $5) maybe the foundation kicks in a
little some
On 10/22/06, Josh Saddler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
[snip]
I think masking is premature; there was never any sort of decision made in the
previous discussion(s) about this.
Relooking at the discussion, it appears
How much would gentoo make in a ciaran vs. devrel fight?
On 10/22/06, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Purpose:
To increase funding for Gentoo Infrastructure and events.
Overview:
Developers volunteer to dual off against other developers (including
retired developers!) in the ring. We t
I think you gave the wrong forum link :)
On 10/23/06, George Prowse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A user has stated this in a thread. Could someone respond please?
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-510146.html
"I suggest that the devs don't hard mask packages, especially ones
depended on by se
On 11/9/06, Bryan Østergaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all, here's the complete log from the Council Meeting + a short
summary.
Summary:
All council members was present (Andrew Gaffney (agaffney) proxied for
Chris Gianello (wolf31o2)).
Agenda was:
1. Reply-to-list
2. SPF
3. QA update / plan
I don't think that officially supported ebuilds that are officially
unsupported is a good idea. If they were officially supported then
they would in effect never be removed, just simply placed somewhere
else. It seems to me that this should be a third party project if
anything.
On 12/19/06, Ste
see http://dev.gentoo.org/~antarus/projects/soc/glep-0052.txt and
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/42044/match=
On 1/17/07, Georgi Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Quoting "Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 2. See the results (and as-yet unpublished GLEP) of Antarus's
Isn't this kind of against what glep40 set out to do?
On 1/28/07, Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
As we all notice from time to time, amd64 team is lacking behind a bit,
due to various reasons. a) manpower, b) a lot of keywording.
Java team asked arch teams if they object w
On 1/28/07, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dan Meltzer wrote:
> Isn't this kind of against what glep40 set out to do?
>
Top posting...
Any way the thing was that the only change in these ebuilds are the
eclasses/eclass functions used and the new eclasses have b
I'm replying here because I couldn't decide whether or not it made
more sense to reply to your email, your blog post, your reply to
flameeyes blog post, your radio commercial, your television
advertisement, or your phone call.
The things that this doesn't do (Or if it does it isn't documented) is
On 3/5/07, Stephen Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 12:49:10 -0500
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What we want to discuss is a possible timeline for completion, and
> what resources you may need to get it done within the agreed timeline.
> Notice that I used
This thread is gay.
On 3/11/07, Stephen Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 15:34:41 +
"Jeff Rollin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Huh? Excuse me, but as I tried to indicate in another message, I'm as
> much on YOUR side as anyone else's.
Then stop continuing the thread.
On 3/13/07, Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Duncan wrote:
> Has anyone stopped to think... he might have an ulterior motive here?
>
> Clearly, it's trolling, the quote above should demonstrate that beyond
> doubt. However, one must ask what the reason might be for such
> deliberate trolls.
On 3/14/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 03:45:01 +0100 Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > QA is supposed to avoid fixing other people's code where things are
> > actively maintained.
>
> I usually ask before messing with other's
On 4/17/07, Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jakub Moc wrote:
> So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> I'm therefore resigning from this project.
>
OMG NO! Please reconsider.
> I'm pret
On Thursday 26 April 2007 3:40:06 pm Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> So as a not-so-brief follow-up to solar's email, here is a brief
> proposal on the automatic assignment stuff, incl. one spot that we might
> need to add an attribute to metadata.xml.
>
> Assignment process, triggering:
> ==
On Thursday 03 May 2007 9:12:35 am Jos Poortvliet wrote:
> Dear people,
>
> In a few days KDE 4 alpha 1 will be released, and we would like to give as
> many people as possible the opportunity to have a look at the next
> generation linux desktop. Thus an article is being prepared to explain to
> p
On Friday 04 May 2007 4:49:47 pm Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks to zmedico we now have support for news items on infra-side and heck
> they are ready to use. And we should use them!
>
> Attaching news item for paludis 0.24.
> Justification: major config format change.
How does this f
On Friday 04 May 2007 6:58:44 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2007 18:50:00 -0400
>
> Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How does this fit the following parts of the GLEP?
> >
> > "Preemptive
>
> Preemptiveness is not a requirement for
On Friday 04 May 2007 7:52:46 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2007 19:48:19 -0400
>
> Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That seems like a really bad road to go down.
> >
> > Would it not be better to extend elog to alert people at the end of
&g
On Friday 04 May 2007 8:01:58 pm Dan Meltzer wrote:
> On Friday 04 May 2007 7:52:46 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 May 2007 19:48:19 -0400
> >
> > Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > That seems like a really bad road to go down.
> > >
On Saturday 05 May 2007 5:34:29 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 05 May 2007 14:26:48 -0700
>
> Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > After some discussion on #-dev there are some improvements that we can
> > make on glep 42.
>
> Well, if you're going about improving it, start by adding in th
On Sunday 06 May 2007 4:48:33 am Petteri Räty wrote:
> Hans de Graaff kirjoitti:
> > What I would like to happen is that the message is added to the tree
> > once, shown to users who have dev-ruby/radiant in testing immediately,
> > and only shown to other users of dev-ruby/radiant when they move r
On Sunday 06 May 2007 1:58:57 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 06 May 2007 10:38:14 -0700
>
> Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > how is that different than using e{info,warn,error}?
>
> It stays visible until the user explicitly acknowledges reading it.
which elog could easily be extended
On Sunday 06 May 2007 2:11:14 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 6 May 2007 14:08:01 -0400
>
> Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sunday 06 May 2007 1:58:57 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Sun, 06 May 2007 10:38:14 -0700
> > >
> > >
On Sunday 06 May 2007 2:21:02 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 6 May 2007 14:17:29 -0400
>
> Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > which elog could easily be extended to do.
> > >
> > > But which elog does not do by default, and for good re
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
