(tongue heading swiftly in the direction of cheek)
Ring ring. Ring ring.
"Hello, Gentoo user list speaking"
"Oh hi. It's the 1990s calling. We want our plain text email back"
"No"
On 12/22/08, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> The bug report is not about the clarity of an already-late reminder.
> The problem is that it was late for me, it will be late for a few
> hundred other posters after me, and it will be late for a few hundred
> posters after them unless something is done abo
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 09:53:07AM +0800, Penguin Lover Mark David Dumlao
squawked:
> As I said there aren't even any terms to search for when you're
> getting ignored. If I had known that the problem was html mails from
> the start, then i would have already corrected the issue before
> searching
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 04:45:50AM +0200, Penguin Lover Arttu V. squawked:
> So, I have another theory, related to the cry "Gentoo is dying!
> ${HERD} is down to one dev only!", i.e, low manpower. My guess is that
> Gentoo (or at least this gentoo-user list) is low on Gnome-proficient
> commenters.
On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 06:05:36 +0800
"Mark David Dumlao" wrote:
> Wow. I didn't expect user...@gentoo.org bugs to be private.
They're private by default because userrel sometimes has to handle
issues in which tempers are flaring and having a public bug on display
could make things worse. This bug
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> Willie Wong wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 02:18:27AM +0200, Penguin Lover Nikos
>> Chantziaras squawked:
>>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
kde-base/kate
kde-base/kdebase-startkde
kde-base/ksmserver
These were dependencies and therefore were not in
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 04:20:25AM +0200, Penguin Lover Nikos Chantziaras
squawked:
> I'm not using -meta packages. Many packages they pulled in was stuff I
> don't wanted (like PIM). I emerged KDE packages one-by-one and went with
> what got pulled in as dependencies.
Uh.. then what exactly
Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> But it is a problem that must be addressed. It doesn't help to boil
> the situation into an inaccurate but amusing caricature of the
> problem. That's how the many bad interfaces get developed.
>
> The problem is solved for my case. I'm not going to be using html
> mails.
Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Eric Martin wrote:
>
>> I've seen plenty of emails going around requesting people not top-post
>> and not to post via html. I don't think it's as big of a problem as
>> this thread makes it out to be. While I'm sure some people do ig
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 09:32:26AM +0800, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> I think you're missing the point. I never asked the community to
> change its rules. I'm only saying that these particular rules were
> invisible, and there's no way to find out about it, and that's going
> to be a problem for any
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Willie Wong wrote:
> So don't be such a pompous ass. We didn't ignore you because we don't
> like you. There's never a policy by the gentoo-user mailing list to
> automatically, collectively ignore all e-mails sent in HTML. We are
> not that well organized. And we
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 09:16:05PM -0600, Penguin Lover Dale squawked:
> This is my two cents. Since when someone comes here and posts a html
> message they get told not to use html anyway, why not let them know
> beforehand that html is not the "norm" on this list? I don't think it
> would hurt
Willie Wong wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 09:16:05PM -0600, Penguin Lover Dale squawked:
>
>> This is my two cents. Since when someone comes here and posts a html
>> message they get told not to use html anyway, why not let them know
>> beforehand that html is not the "norm" on this list? I
On 20 Dec 2008, at 04:34, Arttu V. wrote:
On 12/20/08, Willie Wong wrote:
I think you can try use unmasking the flag:
add a line to /etc/portage/package.use.mask
It's profiles related stuff, so I think
/etc/portage/profiles/package.use.mask will be the right place. At
least if one trusts po
Willie Wong wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 09:16:05PM -0600, Penguin Lover Dale squawked:
>> This is my two cents. Since when someone comes here and posts a html
>> message they get told not to use html anyway, why not let them know
>> beforehand that html is not the "norm" on this list? I don'
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:05:58 -0600
Steven Susbauer wrote:
> Some mail readers convert *asterisks* as bold statements. I believe it
> is the generally accepted way to make a section stand out when dealing
> with plain text.
Yes. The other two kinds of conventional pseudo-markup are /slashes/
for
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 12:03:36PM +0800, Penguin Lover Mark David Dumlao
squawked:
> Pompous ass? Personal Vendetta? Pissed off? What world is this?
>
> One bug report is just an announcement that there is a problem. It
> might seem to you that people get on a high horse when they say that,
> bu
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 04:52:54AM +, Penguin Lover Stroller squawked:
>
> On 20 Dec 2008, at 04:34, Arttu V. wrote:
>
>> On 12/20/08, Willie Wong wrote:
>>> I think you can try use unmasking the flag:
>>> add a line to /etc/portage/package.use.mask
>>
>> It's profiles related stuff, so I thin
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 10:39:30PM -0600, Penguin Lover Dale squawked:
> Well, just do this. *list netiquette* If I recall correctly, if the
> person is set up to get html, that will be in bold. If it is text only
> then they just see the *'s. I have noticed in the past that mine has
> done thi
Starting a new thread because this is getting way off topic (both
re: gentoo or re: the topic under discussion in the other thread)
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:25:12PM -0600, Penguin Lover ??Q?? squawked:
> On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:05:58 -0600
> Steven Susbauer wrote:
>
> > Some mail readers conver
Willie Wong wrote:
> Starting a new thread because this is getting way off topic (both
> re: gentoo or re: the topic under discussion in the other thread)
>
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:25:12PM -0600, Penguin Lover ??Q?? squawked:
>
>> On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:05:58 -0600
>> Steven Susbauer wrote
Willie Wong wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 10:39:30PM -0600, Penguin Lover Dale squawked:
>
>> Well, just do this. *list netiquette* If I recall correctly, if the
>> person is set up to get html, that will be in bold. If it is text only
>> then they just see the *'s. I have noticed in the
On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 00:42:52 -0500
Willie Wong wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 10:39:30PM -0600, Penguin Lover Dale squawked:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:05:58PM -0600, Penguin Lover Steven
> Susbauer squawked:
> > Some mail readers convert *asterisks* as bold statements. I believe
> > it is t
On 22 Dec 2008, at 05:36, Willie Wong wrote:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 04:52:54AM +, Penguin Lover Stroller
squawked:
On 20 Dec 2008, at 04:34, Arttu V. wrote:
On 12/20/08, Willie Wong wrote:
I think you can try use unmasking the flag:
add a line to /etc/portage/package.use.mask
It's
101 - 124 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
