Scripsit Jonathan Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 12:44:03PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > No, but if you don't do it, you forfeit your right to whine about
> > duplicate work when it turns out that you're not the only one who has
> > been doing work without telling anybo
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 12:44:03PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> No, but if you don't do it, you forfeit your right to whine about
> duplicate work when it turns out that you're not the only one who has
> been doing work without telling anybody about it.
So, _both_ people involved should have
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:54:26 +1100, Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Well Marc I have to say that I have received some good advice from James
>as ftpmaster in the past. The ftpmasters are in a better position to
>judge what's best for the archive as a whole than I am (and than many of
>us
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 05:12:38PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> And even if the ITP is filed in time, you can work for the waste
> basked since final ftpmaster approval can only be applied for after
> all work is done.
>
> And there are many cases where Debian has said "no, we don't want your
> pack
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 05:12:38PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> And even if the ITP is filed in time, you can work for the waste
> basked since final ftpmaster approval can only be applied for after
> all work is done.
>
> And there are many cases where Debian has said "no, we don't want your
> pack
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:17:08 +1100, Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 12:14:38PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> Why should he? If writing an ITP as the very first action is what you
>> think best, then do it like this, but that doesn't mean that everybody
>
>If you do
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 12:14:38PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Why should he? If writing an ITP as the very first action is what you
> think best, then do it like this, but that doesn't mean that everybody
> must do that.
It's simply a matter of timing and fact. The sooner you ITP, the less
likel
Hi!
On 2003-11-17 0:17 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> If you don't write the ITP first, you run the risk of somebody else
> duplicating your work! Exactly what happened here.
Not quite exactly, as far as I understood, Filip did not send an ITP
at all. This would have decreased the chance of dou
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 12:14:38PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> On 2003-11-15 17:37 -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 11:55:46PM +0100, Duck wrote:
> > > I was writing an ITP when you posted that and suddendly, saw all my
> > > work preparation turned into ashes.
> >
> > Duck,
Scripsit Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> If writing an ITP as the very first action is what you think best,
> then do it like this, but that doesn't mean that everybody must do
> that.
No, but if you don't do it, you forfeit your right to whine about
duplicate work when it turns out that you're
Hi!
On 2003-11-15 17:37 -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 11:55:46PM +0100, Duck wrote:
> > I was writing an ITP when you posted that and suddendly, saw all my
> > work preparation turned into ashes.
>
> Duck, perhaps you should have written the ITP earlier.
Why should he? If
11 matches
Mail list logo
