On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 02:37:41 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| > They're not relevant to this discussion. We're not discussing what
| > the right solution is, we're discussing why Sunrise is the wrong
| > solution. There's a hell of a difference -- as an illustration,
| > most peop
>
> They're not relevant to this discussion. We're not discussing what the
> right solution is, we're discussing why Sunrise is the wrong solution.
> There's a hell of a difference -- as an illustration, most people could
> tell you why giving everybody nukes is the wrong way to get peace in
> th
On Monday 31 July 2006 02:21, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> I don't have a perfect solution, no. Unfortunately, knowing why one
> thing won't work doesn't automatically let you know what will.
and knowing what does/doesnt work comes a lot from experience, not solely
making conjectures about how we thi
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:10:52 -0600 Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Britney Spears being the Sunrise Developers and the evacuees being..
| a bunch of packages that have no relevance whatsoever since they're
| copies of ebuilds already in bugzilla? When Britney crashes and
| burns the ebuilds
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:22:33 -0600 Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?
|
| You know, that was a completely unnecessary personal attack. God
| forbid anyone take the time to attemp
On Monday 31 July 2006 01:53, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:38:42 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | Please note the difference between pulling and pushing. Pushing
> | implies that people who don't want sunrise on their systems have to
> | have it and have to use it.
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:38:42 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 06:30 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Their commit history backs it up all by itself.
|
| Ppint to specifically what, in their respective histories, proves your
| case. This is like pulling tee
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 06:30 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Their commit history backs it up all by itself.
Ppint to specifically what, in their respective histories, proves your
case. This is like pulling teeth.
> | Where is this code being pushed to, exactly?
>
> Users.
Please note the dif
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:22:33 -0600 Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
| > | This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual
| > | Gentoo developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].
|
| > Did you look
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:50:40 -0400
"Brett I. Holcomb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Continue with *top-posting* as it is.
Does Gentoo gives more choises to users or not?
With the freedom/choise comes the responsibility (if anything breaks).
Gentoo is known not to be for *everybody* (unless he/she
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
| This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
| developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].
Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?
You know, that was a completely u
On 7/30/06, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
| developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].
Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo develo
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 03:53 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Partly, the part where it's run by people who have little clue about
> ebuild development or QA, who will be taking code from people who have
> little clue about ebuild development or QA and giving it to other
> people who have little clu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
> | developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].
>
> Did you look at *whi
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:42:52 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| What, honestly, are people worried about with Sunrise?
Partly, the part where it's run by people who have little clue about
ebuild development or QA, who will be taking code from people who have
little clue about ebuil
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:36:36 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 05:27 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?
|
| Is this sort of degeneration really necessary?
Considering how one of the major conce
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 05:27 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?
Is this sort of degeneration really necessary?
> Even that aside, if a couple of hundred developers can't handle doing
> QA for all those maintainer-wanted ebuilds, what
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
| developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].
Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?
Even that aside, if a couple of hu
On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 23:50 -0400, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> My concern is beyond me. As I stated I know enough about what to expect IF
> I
> use sunrise. But many do not and with it becoming official people figure
> it's gentoo and when it breaks Gentoo suffers. Gentoo has a reputation as a
On 7/30/06, Brett I. Holcomb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My concerns - first for my systems - are that it is allowing essentially
anybody to
submit almost anything with no QA.
This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1]. Every
Thierry Carrez wrote:
Those were nominated but did not (yet) confirm their participation :
`Kumba
Arrr me mateys!
err, that's not until Sept. 19thmy bad. Reading over the current nominees,
the field looks pretty varied. It'll be a fun race. So I suppose I'll throw my
hat into the mi
My concern is beyond me. As I stated I know enough about what to expect IF I
use sunrise. But many do not and with it becoming official people figure
it's gentoo and when it breaks Gentoo suffers. Gentoo has a reputation as a
good solid, stable distro. As user and big fan of Gentoo I'm conc
On Sunday 30 July 2006 23:32, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> - first for my systems - are that it is allowing essentially anybody to
> submit almost anything with no QA.
no, read the FAQ
http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq#Howareyouensuringthatthereisnob0rken/maliciuscodegettingintoth
OK wait, on your servers, are you actually planning to *use* any of the
ebuilds in Sunrise's overlay?
If not, how is it a concern? I personally don't use any of them, and my
system is running perfectly fine.
Let's not forget that nobody is shoving Sunrise down anyone's throat...
--
Seemant Ku
I am only a user and have been keeping out of this debate but I feel I need to
at least express my thoughts. I have been folllowing the Sunrise thread(s)
since it started. I have done a couple of ebuilds a long time ago and
would love to have been able to contribute to Gentoo but due to time
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 04:06 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:50:31 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | Show me at least that concern being concrete and we have a
> | starting place.
>
> -!- [Users #gentoo-sunrise]
> -!- @genstef devon bonsaikitten_ Zamorate
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:50:31 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Show me at least that concern being concrete and we have a
| starting place.
-!- [Users #gentoo-sunrise]
-!- @genstef devon bonsaikitten_ Zamorate eimono|home dev-zero brebs
staskorz @nichoj_work eimono SunriseCIA rich
On Sunday 30 July 2006 22:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:19:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | we take a risk with this project (like every single other
> | project) ... if sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we
> | kill it, no big deal
>
> How many
On Sunday 30 July 2006 22:28, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency
> they desire, contributing to gentoo casually.
load up your browser and check out how many bugs are assigned
to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
opening a bug, putting together an ebuild/pa
On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 03:35 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:19:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | we take a risk with this project (like every single other
> | project) ... if sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we
> | kill it, no big deal
On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 22:28 -0400, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> I do not see why it is considdered hard for users to "get involved".
> Users have at least two choices that I can think of right now, and
> probably a number that I cannot think of.
What's wrong with adding a third? Furthermore, a third whe
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:19:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| we take a risk with this project (like every single other
| project) ... if sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we
| kill it, no big deal
How many more users and developers will have to be lost before it'
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 Sunday 30 July 2006 18:47, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> There is nothing you or anyone else can say
well if you're coming forth with such stout resolution of ignoring any one
else's input, then there's no point in debating the topic with you now is
there ?
-mike
pgpRLmOrTjAue.pgp
Description:
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 to get involved in our development process ... i imagine
On 7/30/06, Stephen P. Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is nothing you or anyone else can say that will make me
think otherwise,
You won't listen, yet you expect to be listened to. Speaking as a user
and lover of Gentoo I believe you should resign as a developer.
On this list and on IRC
Alec Warner wrote:
I'm not sure if I'm misreading here, I'm not advocating we dump older
gcc versions. Moreso I'm advocating we dump code that doesn't compile
with newer gcc/toolchain versions that no one is willing to fix. We
have had devs in the past bring in far too many packages and then j
Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Those were nominated but did not (yet) confirm their participation :
>
> agriffis
> AllanonJL
> azarah
> christel
> CHTEKK
> george
> jaervosz
> jakub
> johnm
> kito
> kosmikus
> `Kumba
> marienz
> Mr_Bones_
> nichoj
> plasmaroo
> pvdabeel
> Ramereth
> rl03
> seemant
> solar
Ryan Hill wrote:
> Alec Warner wrote:
>
>> Another class of packages I wish to discuss (not remove quite yet, just
>> talking ;) ) are older packages with stable markings. By Stable I mean
>> debian stable, IE we stabled it in 2004 and no one has touched it since.
>>
>> Do these packages still wor
Stephen P. Becker wrote:
Ok, since the first time around apparently wasn't good enough, how about
this? This project sucks. It takes random ebuilds without enough merit
or demand to even have some team and/or developer within Gentoo pick it
up, and dumps it to a
user-supported-yet-completely
Alec Warner wrote:
Another class of packages I wish to discuss (not remove quite yet, just
talking ;) ) are older packages with stable markings. By Stable I mean
debian stable, IE we stabled it in 2004 and no one has touched it since.
Do these packages still work with a current system (linux 2
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 27 July 2006 18:21, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
Looking at the meeting log, the
council even noted that the concerns had not been addressed
no, we noted that people claimed they had concerns but when cornered and asked
what exactly their concerns were, no more r
On Monday 24 July 2006 20:28, Peper wrote:
> Comments are welcome again :]
what ebuilds would this actually be useful in ? looking through the code
largely gives me the impression of over engineering and not much else
-mike
pgpdWFj2i5blA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 17:51:09 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| then what else would you expect the Council to do ?
Personally I'd expect the council to block the thing permanently. The
council is, after all, supposed to serve as the last line of defence
against people pushing throu
On Thursday 27 July 2006 18:21, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Looking at the meeting log, the
> council even noted that the concerns had not been addressed
no, we noted that people claimed they had concerns but when cornered and asked
what exactly their concerns were, no more responses were to be ha
On Friday 28 July 2006 06:02, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 11:35:24AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > Mike asked you repeatedly to voice your issues or concerns in relation
> > to Project Sunrise, which you failed to reply to.
>
> How many times are we supposed to raise
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thierry Carrez wrote:
>
> Those were nominated but did not (yet) confirm their participation :
>
> tsunam
>
While honored to be possible considered to be able to help guide the
technical direction of gentoo. I however don't feel that I'm capable
of it
Thierry Carrez wrote:
> We're nearing the end of the nomination period.
> (Those developers should accept their nomination before July 31, 23:59
> UTC, else they won't participate in the election)
I'd like to nominate Andrej Kacian (ticho). He's quite a silent dev
(speaking about -dev and -core fl
On Friday 28 July 2006 01:55, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> So long and thank you for all the fish,
> Brix
I really hate to return home from a long weekend to read these kind of emails.
I'm very sad to see you go, you really improved alot on the wireless experience!
Good luck with your future pro
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 03:07:03PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Those were nominated but did not (yet) confirm their participation :
>
> rl03
Thanks, I accept.
--
Renat Lumpau all things web-apps
C6A838DA 04AF B5EE 17CB 1000 DDA5 D3FC 1338 ADC2 C6A8 38DA
pgpRG5Jh34ZKG.pgp
De
Good evening,
the ppc32 team had a short monthly meeting tonight.
Discussed topics:
1) kernel for 2006.1
We will include the 2.6.17 kernel for the 2006.1 release.
There is one issue with the Marvell NIC on the Pegasos left,
but including that driver as a module will not hurt anybody
by default.
> Those were nominated but did not (yet) confirm their participation :
> jakub
Wh, someone nominated me? Thanks, I accept. ;)
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 03:07:03PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Those were nominated but did not (yet) confirm their participation :
>
> plasmaroo
I'll decline, maybe next year... :)
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Thierry Carrez wrote:
>
> Those were nominated but did not (yet) confirm their participation :
>
> CHTEKK
Well, I accept. :)
Thanks to whoever nominated me!
--
Best regards,
Luca Longinotti aka CHTEKK
LongiTEKK Networks Admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Dev: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SysCP Dev: [EMAIL
On Saturday 29 July 2006 15:07, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Those were nominated but did not (yet) confirm their participation :
> jaervosz
I'll accept the nomination again this year.
--
Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen
Gentoo Linux Security Team
pgpMVPo0HIJAx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On 7/30/06, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Another class of packages I wish to discuss (not remove quite yet, just
talking ;) ) are older packages with stable markings. By Stable I mean
debian stable, IE we stabled it in 2004 and no one has touched it since.
Do these packages still work
As the lead for the treecleaner project (team, whatever you want to call
it wolf ;) ), I've been trying to fix old broken packages, many have
been slated for removal, some have had minor fixes, and others are still
setting waiting for me to get some free time.
Another class of packages I wish to d
On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 15:50 +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Friday 28 July 2006 20:51, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > Robert Cernansky wrote:
> > > If I have some application that is not included in portage why
> > > I decide to make an ebuild? Because I hope that then it will be
> > > accepted and i
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>
>>> 1) thousands of packages will never be marked stable
>> Honestly, they shouldn't be stable.
>
> hmm, maybe we should have different groups of ports (*1) for
>
> a) quite stable: no bugs yet and enough votes)
> b) *proven* to be stable: has passed the whole bunch
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> The gentoo devs currently do much of the upstream's work.
> Fixing bugs or even adding new stuff which does not directly have to
> do w/ gentoo should be done exlusively by the upstream.
This is not really a problem. Fixing bugs is what I enjoy after all, this is the
intere
dev-java/saxon-bin is going to be removed from the tree as soon as the
from sources version dev-java/saxon gets marked stable on arches that
have saxon-bin stable. I will add a package move and a revision bump so
that user will have a smooth upgrade. I will also adjust app-text/jing
to work with th
On Friday 28 July 2006 20:51, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Robert Cernansky wrote:
> > If I have some application that is not included in portage why
> > I decide to make an ebuild? Because I hope that then it will be
> > accepted and included to portage, so maintained by developers (big
> > thanks for
62 matches
Mail list logo
