-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> some topics off the top of my head:
> - unaddressed CoC issues:
> - add a "mission" statement
> - fix wording to have a positive spin
> - what else ?
> - sync Social Contract with Gentoo Foundation statement
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue,
03 Apr 2007 14:54:26 -0400:
> Now, I'm not going to reiterate all the junk people have said they want,
> since it's all archived for prosperity.
Now /that/ was worth the read. Interesting eggcorn[1] there. =8
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 19:30 +0200, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> I just don't think it is obvious what tests should be performed. Furthermore
> the difference between
> the different systems is not just performance, but also features. So we need
> to discuss what
> standards any candidate SCM
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 19:30:29 +0200
"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Therefore I'd like to
> know what architectures need to be supported by a candidate SCM.
Oh that's an easy one.
All arches that Gentoo supports.
Also it needs to support FreeBSD :)
Thanks
Roy
--
gentoo-d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 11:52 +0200, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
>> So in light of all that I don't think it is wasteful to restart this
>> discussion.
>
> I do.
>
> Want to bring it back up? Go perform some tests and repo
Mike Kelly wrote:
Alec Warner wrote:
The fact that Gentoo can continue with the codebase is irrelevant. I
think moreso the fact that a particular Package Manager would be the
'Gentoo Package Manager' means in my mind that Gentoo is responsible for
said Package Manager. If someone were to sl
On Sun, 2007-04-01 at 16:32 -0500, Samir Faci wrote:
> Sorry guys, I didn't think this would be considered spam, I was
> actually hoping some of the gentoo dev, if any are in the area would
> be interesting in participating and representing gentoo in the
> conference.
Well, you should probably try
Juan Pablo Olivera wrote:
>
Try this: [EMAIL PROTECTED] That will work
better for you. Well, after you confirm it anyway. ;-)
Dale
:-) :-)
--
www.myspace.com/-remove-me-dalek1967
Copy n paste then remove the -remove-me- part.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 11:52 +0200, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> So in light of all that I don't think it is wasteful to restart this
> discussion.
I do.
Want to bring it back up? Go perform some tests and report back with
some data if you feel prior efforts weren't done properly or
reproduc
Alec Warner wrote:
> The fact that Gentoo can continue with the codebase is irrelevant. I
> think moreso the fact that a particular Package Manager would be the
> 'Gentoo Package Manager' means in my mind that Gentoo is responsible for
> said Package Manager. If someone were to slip evil code int
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
11 matches
Mail list logo
