Kumba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 23:20:30 -0400:
> gentoo-project
I too like the idea, and that name gets my vote.
Does mail/lists have anything like the followup-to header of news?
That'd be perfect for the "belongs in -project" posts,
Kumba wrote:
> >> what should we call it? Vote on this!
> >
> > If users have votes ...
Then I'd vote for gentoo-project.
It seems to me that politics covers just a part of all possible non-technical
topics. Depends on how you define politics though.
Roman
pgpUqVXAIRKN3.pgp
Description: PGP
> On Fri, 08 Jun 2007, Steve Long wrote:
>> Not to mention again, we are limiting choice, and forcing one or
>> the other. Which is not a complete solution, and makes our
>> offerings less than all other mainstream distros.
> Good points. Imo, you should get some scripts together and do it in
Philip Webb wrote:
070607 Kumba wrote:
what should we call it? Vote on this!
If users have votes ...
Since I'm pretty much the pikachu-loving nutball that proposed this, I don't see
why not. Users are as much a part of Gentoo as the developers are.
--Kumba
--
Gentoo/MIPS Team Lead
"S
William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> That's the beauty of both upstream design and reality.
>
> THERE IS NO NEED FOR ESELECT
>
But eselect makes gentoo so 3l337.. ;)
> Apps will either use and/or be developed for gnupg-1 or gnupg-2. They
> are different binaries, versioned by upstream. Have different
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
>>> No can do - temporarily banning is a bad thing, its censorship, and we
>>> can't have that, no sir.
>>>
>> It's censorship when it's being done one-sidedly in order to skew an
>> argument based upon the prejudices
070607 Kumba wrote:
> what should we call it? Vote on this!
If users have votes ...
> gentoo-politics
... that gets mine: let's keep it quite clear what it is.
--
,,
SUPPORT ___//___, Philip Webb : [EMAIL PROTECT
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
We might need some sort of enforcement for that particular purpose.
While I think that "behavior" proctors are inappropriate, I think that
people with ability to say "move this thread to gentoo-politics or else.."
for non-technical threads, as well as "stop failin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 08:56:58AM -0500, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> Hi William,
>
> Could you point me to a noob's guide to espeak? I cannot seem to get it
> to output any speech. voyageur on IRC stated that it worked for him via
> 'aoss espeak "h
Duncan wrote:
> The difference, as I read the proposal, is that while Sunrise is about
> packages that are /not/ in the main tree yet (if it's moved to the tree,
> it's out of sunrise, tho it might move to another overlay if
> appropriate), this proposal would extend that to packages that are in th
Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:38:49 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If Portage currently happens to, say, disable sandbox if an ebuild
sets GIVE_ME_A_COOKIE="yes" globally, it does not mean that ebuilds
may rely upon this behaviour, nor does it mean that Portage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 18:10 +0200, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
>> >> On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 05:29:47 PM Grant Goodyear wrote:
>> >> I'm sure they have the best intentions but I've never seen any clear
>> >> guidelines for th
"Wulf C. Krueger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 07 Jun
2007 16:50:54 +0200:
> I mostly agree with your arguments but seeing what we have in the
> Sunrise overlay I don't think we need another one.
>
> Today, people can get involved by submitting ebuilds t
Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 08:37:05 -0500:
> Not everyone had your perception either - in fact, it would appear that
> a lot of people have the same perception as me, which is that Neddy saw
> the potential of this thread
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:38:49 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If Portage currently happens to, say, disable sandbox if an ebuild
> sets GIVE_ME_A_COOKIE="yes" globally, it does not mean that ebuilds
> may rely upon this behaviour, nor does it mean that Portage cannot
> change in s
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 23:31:38 +0200
Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If the question is whether it's accepted, what matters is whether it's
> accepted. If you're interested in legality, ask whether it should be
> accepted, not whether it is. spb did that in the same message, and I
> respon
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:15:35PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:52:39 +0200
> Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 09:40:20PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:33:21 +0200
> > > Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:52:39 +0200
Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 09:40:20PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:33:21 +0200
> > Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > An ebuild's PROVIDE list.
> >
> > Nnnnope. Not legal.
>
> The qu
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 09:40:20PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:33:21 +0200
> Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > An ebuild's PROVIDE list.
>
> Nnnnope. Not legal.
The question was "Is there any place in the tree where a dep atom and a
CPV are both accepted?" Lo
On Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2007, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Carsten, no offense but I think you totally misunderstood the scope of
> what I was trying to convey
Yeah, sorry, should have had read your initial email carefully. Taking
anything before the last - as version information is indeed a Portage bu
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:33:21 +0200
Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> An ebuild's PROVIDE list.
According to PMS at least, PROVIDE only allows category/package, with
no versioning.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 22:33:21 +0200
Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> An ebuild's PROVIDE list.
Nnnnope. Not legal.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
> Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
>> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
>>> Marius Mauch wrote:
Do you really think people would voluntarily use it? That's an
>> honest question, maybe people are fair enough to do it, but I have
>> serious doubts about it. It's of no u
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 09:31:44PM +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 19:42:45 +0200
> Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Thing is: if you see sys-fs/ntfs-3g, is that an atom or a CPV? You
> > don't know unless you actually check the tree.
>
> Is there any place in the
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 11:28:26 -0700
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 4. If the first character was a !, then remember that, strip the !
> from S, and repeat from 2.
> 5. If you reach this point, you have something that is not valid.
Sorry, but I completely fail to understand what tha
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:04:17 -0400
Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's exactly what I'm saying. CPV (Category/Package/Version)
> requires =, >=, <, <= to begin it.
Nope. Something that starts with an operator is a versioned atom. A CPV
is used in other places when a specific versio
Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2007, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > That's exactly what I'm saying. CPV (Category/Package/Version) requires
> > =, >=, <, <= to begin it.
>
> So you'd like to change every foo/bar occurrence (and that's the common case)
> to >=foo/bar
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 19:42:45 +0200
Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thing is: if you see sys-fs/ntfs-3g, is that an atom or a CPV? You
> don't know unless you actually check the tree.
Is there any place in the tree where a dep atom and a CPV are both
accepted? Should there be?
--
[EMAIL
Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2007, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>
>> That's exactly what I'm saying. CPV (Category/Package/Version) requires
>> =, >=, <, <= to begin it.
>>
>
> So you'd like to change every foo/bar occurrence (and that's the common case)
> to >=foo/bar-0 !? Comp
On Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2007, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> That's exactly what I'm saying. CPV (Category/Package/Version) requires
> =, >=, <, <= to begin it.
So you'd like to change every foo/bar occurrence (and that's the common case)
to >=foo/bar-0 !? Completely out of line, imho. I don't understand
Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
> > Marius Mauch wrote:
> >> Do you really think people would voluntarily use it? That's an
> honest question, maybe people are fair enough to do it, but I have
> serious doubts about it. It's of no use if people have to be told to
> move
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 02:04:08PM -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>
>>> Thing is: if you see sys-fs/ntfs-3g, is that an atom or a CPV? You
>>> don't know unless you actually check the tree.
>>>
>> I thought that was the whole point of =. That identifies CPV instead
On Thursday, June 7, 2007 08:34:37 PM Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> Well the difference is that AFAIK Sunrise is just for maintainer-wanted
> stuff that's not in the tree yet, but Michael talks about (rev)bumps of
> stuff that's already in tree.
AFAIK, if the maintainer agrees, it's fine to have other
On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 02:57:28 +0900
Georgi Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> maillog: 07/06/2007-19:42:45(+0200): Marius Mauch types
> > Thing is: if you see sys-fs/ntfs-3g, is that an atom or a CPV? You
> > don't know unless you actually check the tree.
>
> Isn't "sys-fs/ntfs-3g" the atom and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 07:43 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote:
>> What I would like to propose is that we have an official (yes, official)
>> cvs overlay that is used by developers *and* contributors to commit new
>> ebuilds and c
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 02:04:08PM -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > Thing is: if you see sys-fs/ntfs-3g, is that an atom or a CPV? You
> > don't know unless you actually check the tree.
> I thought that was the whole point of =. That identifies CPV instead of
> an atom.
If you look the DEPEND/RDEPE
Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:32:40 -0400
> Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> Doug Goldstein wrote:
>>
>>> Currently in the tree we have sys-fs/ntfs3g. However the proper
>>> upstream name and name referenced in every single doc in the world
>>> is "ntfs-3g". I t
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 07:43 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote:
> What I would like to propose is that we have an official (yes, official)
> cvs overlay that is used by developers *and* contributors to commit new
> ebuilds and changes to. Mirrors would still pull, as they always have,
> from the gentoo-
maillog: 07/06/2007-19:42:45(+0200): Marius Mauch types
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:32:40 -0400
> Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > > Currently in the tree we have sys-fs/ntfs3g. However the proper
> > > upstream name and name referenced in every single doc in th
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 12:32:40 -0400
Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > Currently in the tree we have sys-fs/ntfs3g. However the proper
> > upstream name and name referenced in every single doc in the world
> > is "ntfs-3g". I tried to rename the package however, Por
Doug Goldstein wrote:
Currently in the tree we have sys-fs/ntfs3g. However the proper upstream
name and name referenced in every single doc in the world is "ntfs-3g".
I tried to rename the package however, Portage does not let me since it
is invalid naming. marienz and genone informed me it's inv
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:50:02 -0500
> Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> No can do - temporarily banning is a bad thing, its censorship, and we
>> can't have that, no sir.
>
> It's censorship when it's being done one-sidedly in order to skew an
> argument base
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:50:02 -0500
> Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> No can do - temporarily banning is a bad thing, its censorship, and we
>> can't have that, no sir.
>>
>
> It's censorship when it's being done one-sidedly in order to skew an
> a
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:50:02 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No can do - temporarily banning is a bad thing, its censorship, and we
> can't have that, no sir.
It's censorship when it's being done one-sidedly in order to skew an
argument based upon the prejudices of those doin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
> Marius Mauch wrote:
>> Do you really think people would voluntarily use it? That's an honest
>> question, maybe people are fair enough to do it, but I have serious doubts
>> about it. It's of no use if people have t
070607 Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
> people with ability to say "move this to gentoo-politics or else.."
> for non-technical threads, as well as "stop failing to use logic
> in your technical discussion or else..." with power
> to temporarily ban people for non-compliance could be a useful thi
Marius Mauch wrote:
> Do you really think people would voluntarily use it? That's an honest
> question, maybe people are fair enough to do it, but I have serious doubts
> about it. It's of no use if people have to be told to move threads from -dev
> to that new list.
>
We might need some sort
On Thursday, June 7, 2007 01:43:45 PM Michael Cummings wrote:
> ...or, Trees and Tree Climbers: Shaking up the tree
You forgot about the tree huggers! ;-)
I mostly agree with your arguments but seeing what we have in the Sunrise
overlay I don't think we need another one.
Today, people can get
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Howdy all,
>
> I just bumped into something I feel is a Portage and PMS bug. Since I
> believe in concrete use cases, I'll just go with that.
>
> Currently in the tree we have sys-fs/ntfs3g. However the proper upstream
> name and name referenced in every single doc in the wo
Marius Mauch wrote:
Do you really think people would voluntarily use it? That's an honest question,
maybe people are fair enough to do it, but I have serious doubts about it. It's
of no use if people have to be told to move threads from -dev to that new list.
Most of what I wrote was tongue
Luca Barbato wrote:
I'm ok with it, just I'd like to have it available as gentoo-fortune please.
(btw I'd like to see the quotebot back from the old ages!)
Oh, I could easily see the quote package for gentoo-politics (or whatever its
called) raising much laughter (among other things).
And
Howdy all,
I just bumped into something I feel is a Portage and PMS bug. Since I
believe in concrete use cases, I'll just go with that.
Currently in the tree we have sys-fs/ntfs3g. However the proper upstream
name and name referenced in every single doc in the world is "ntfs-3g".
I tried to renam
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
William Hubbs wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> app-accessibility/festival has not done a release upstream in some time.
> We currently have several bugs against this package, including one
> security bug.
>
> Since a lot of blind people are now using espeak as t
Christian Parpart wrote:
+1 here too
possible alternative names: gentoo-soap, gentoo-gossip ( not to be
confused with net-im/gossip )
gentoo-soap, lol!
"And these are the Flames of our Lives..."
--Kumba
--
Gentoo/MIPS Team Lead
"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels
Hello Chris!
I'm shortening your mail greatly and respond to only a few aspects because
the two of us seem to agree on a great deal of those points you made.
On Thursday, June 7, 2007 01:45:43 AM Chris Gianelloni wrote:
[Proctors]
> Well, they've been asked to write guidelines for Council approv
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> The Code of Conduct was written with the hopes that its existence would
> help to curb the flamewars and other general nastiness between people
> within the community. The proctors were created to enforce the Code of
> Co
Alexandre Buisse wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2007 at 12:20:07 +0200, George Prowse wrote:
[...] before trying to stop a thread
descending into anarchy?
I wish it was descending into anarchy. Which is a highly organized
social system, and doesn't have anything to do with chaos. Anarchy is
just a sys
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:15:58 +0100
George Prowse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All this is immaterial anyway because even if it had been extensively
discussed at length then the proctors would still have acted the
same
If that really were the case, it would just be an even
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
...or, Trees and Tree Climbers: Shaking up the tree
Parts of this argument have been raised before. If this particular angle
has already been addressed, kindly point me to the archive so I can see
whether I have anything new and original to add or not
On Thu, Jun 7, 2007 at 12:20:07 +0200, George Prowse wrote:
> [...] before trying to stop a thread
> descending into anarchy?
I wish it was descending into anarchy. Which is a highly organized
social system, and doesn't have anything to do with chaos. Anarchy is
just a system where there is no a
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 02:19:55 -0400
Kumba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So I'm told debian has one of these types of MLs, probably where the flames
> burn
> bright enough to have earned a star designation from the IAU. Given what's
> been
> going on lately, and with calls from myself and oth
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 06:08:48PM +0200, Christian Heim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> It's my pleasure to welcome back Deedra Waters (also known as dmwaters on
> IRC).
Welcome back Deedra :)
tomaw
pgp4cdwpBVWlW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Perhaps if the proctors had discussed things first, they wouldn't have
made two major screwups that resulted in Gentoo losing yet another
developer.
Might I suggest that anybody who is waiting for "one last straw" go
ahead and take a month or two off right now and save
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:15:58 +0100
George Prowse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All this is immaterial anyway because even if it had been extensively
> discussed at length then the proctors would still have acted the
> same
If that really were the case, it would just be an even stronger
argument fo
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 01:08 +0100, George Prowse wrote:
from http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/coc.xml
Look at the Council logs from the CoC being approved and the ones since.
We asked for real guidelines so we could specifically avoid this sort of
problem from happ
Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I propose to create a new global USE flag:
As there was no objections (mcummings does not count), I did so.
V-Li
--
http://www.gentoo.org/
http://www.faulhammer.org/
http://www.gnupg.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Kent Fredric wrote:
> possible alternative names: gentoo-soap, gentoo-gossip ( not to be
> confused with net-im/gossip )
Please, please, make it gentoo-circuits [1].
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_My_Circuits
Yours faithfully,
-jkt
--
cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth
signature.
On Thursday 07 June 2007 09:10:41 Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 6/7/07, Kumba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Anyways, thoughts?
> >
> > --Kumba
>
> +1
+1 here too
> possible alternative names: gentoo-soap, gentoo-gossip ( not to be
> confused with net-im/gossip )
gentoo-soap, lol!
signature.asc
Des
Kumba wrote:
> So anyways, I'm all for this list, humour aside. It's blatantly obvious
> people need a place to vent at times, and I think that by separating the
> politics from the technical discussion, it might help in some way. Yes,
> it'll also be the source of many problems too. I can't env
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kumba wrote:
> And maybe a dev who
> secretly dabbles in another OSlike Wind...err, Ubuntu!
I thought this position has been already filled :)
- --
Vlastimil Babka (Caster)
Gentoo/Java
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux
On 6/7/07, Kumba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyways, thoughts?
--Kumba
+1
possible alternative names: gentoo-soap, gentoo-gossip ( not to be
confused with net-im/gossip )
And just for fits and giggles, the occasional person can start a fake
flame war just to keep us on our toes as to whats
71 matches
Mail list logo
