On Wed, 25 Jan 2012, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I gave it a bit more thought, but yes, I still think separation would be
> better. Even if the infrastructure change would not be a game changer,
> you can see it as a dependency of the role/commitment part.
Yes. OK, I'll try to decouple them at lea
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 08:28:59AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> You're probably right that I should deal with them separately. But in
> truth, this part is the one where I see the most long term benefits for
> Debian because MIA tracking, knowing who is responsible of what, and
> what you can ex
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > I expect that the most difficult part will be to decide how to deal with
> > the "commitment tracking" part. What should we log? What sort of
> > relationships should be defined and what should they imply (in terms of
> > default set of information
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 04:32:40PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I have started to work on a DEP that is a bit broader in scope but that
> should fix this at the same time.
>
> http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep2/
Thanks a lot for doing this!
There many many things in it that I like and that I thi
Hi,
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 09:39:57AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > If someone cares enough about that to work on it, I'd like to see a
> > document(DEP-like) that would include:
>
> I second this proposal, it seems to really be what we need.
>
Le lundi 1 décembre 2008 08:39:23, vous avez écrit :
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 November 2008 10:49, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > Holger your request is not really acceptable in the current situation
> > > but I also think that Uploaders/Maintainers should
6 matches
Mail list logo
