On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46:18PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
> >I'm interrested onm co-maintaining lvm2 and device-mapper.
> As am I - we use these heavily on some fairly serious kit at work, so I
> can justify the time... co-maintaining sounds like a sensible thing to
> do.
Okay, I requested a pr
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 02:08:44PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 05:11:50PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
> > How should we coordinate this?
>
> Alioth is used for many debian work, so this should be sufficient.
>
Even more when it will stabilize itself :) We are all awating fo
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 01:11:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Patrick, it might even be worth all 4 of us maintaining all the LVM
> related packages (throwing lvm10 in with the rest), since Tim uses
> multipath-tools, and none of us care much for lvm10.
There is no debian kernel which lacks su
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 05:11:50PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
> How should we coordinate this?
Alioth is used for many debian work, so this should be sufficient.
Bastian
--
Spock: We suffered 23 casualties in that attack, Captain.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 01:11:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
>
> My recommendation would be an LVM alioth project, w/ a svn or arch
> (preferred) repository. I've kept track of lvm2 stuff in arch for a
> number of years, it has worked well.
>
> Patrick, it might even be worth all 4 of us main
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 17:11:50 +, Tim Cutts wrote:
>
> On 18 Jan 2005, at 4:06 pm, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46:18PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
>>>
>>> On 17 Jan 2005, at 5:42 pm, Bastian Blank wrote:
>>>
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfi
On 18 Jan 2005, at 4:06 pm, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46:18PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
On 17 Jan 2005, at 5:42 pm, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
lvm2 - in active development, upstream helpful but often
busy.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46:18PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
>
> On 17 Jan 2005, at 5:42 pm, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> >>lvm2- in active development, upstream helpful but often
> >>busy.
> >>device-mapper - larg
On 17 Jan 2005, at 5:42 pm, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
lvm2 - in active development, upstream helpful but often busy.
device-mapper - largely stable. occasional releases.
lvm10 - stable. no more upstream development at a
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:28:56AM +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> lvm2 - in active development, upstream helpful but often busy.
> device-mapper - largely stable. occasional releases.
> lvm10 - stable. no more upstream development at all.
> lvm-common - native package. sm
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:28:56 +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> What with a change of circumstances and lack of time recently I don't honestly
> think I'm doing a good enough job on the LVM packages, so I'm offering them up
> for adoption to anyone who thinks they can do a better job.
>
> The pack
On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 09:28 +, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> What with a change of circumstances and lack of time recently I don't honestly
> think I'm doing a good enough job on the LVM packages, so I'm offering them up
> for adoption to anyone who thinks they can do a better job.
>
> The packag
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> What with a change of circumstances and lack of time recently I don't honestly
> think I'm doing a good enough job on the LVM packages, so I'm offering them up
> for adoption to anyone who thinks they can do a better job.
And please, whomever get it,
What with a change of circumstances and lack of time recently I don't honestly
think I'm doing a good enough job on the LVM packages, so I'm offering them up
for adoption to anyone who thinks they can do a better job.
The packages are:
lvm2- in active development, upstream helpful but
14 matches
Mail list logo
