On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 08:48:30PM +0400, Igor wrote:
> Do we have an agreement on this one from everyone of the list?
>
Agreement on what, precisely...?
In open source, better implementations usually gain more mindshare.
If you think you can write one (and the project is interesting to you)
go
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 01:52:18PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>
> The improvement is to the ebuild itself. It is a variable containing a
> list of directories upon which the module's build system depends.
>
> I spoke to naota and he doesn't have any problem sending this upstream,
> so I sent an em
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 09:03:41PM -0400, Olivier Cr?te wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 18:15 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > which is trivial to fix and anyone with commit privs could have done. it
> > certainly doesnt warrant a paniced "the sky is falling" message.
>
> I think this is a great
On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 05:50:49PM +0100, George Prowse wrote:
> That assumes the system is working perfectly and the whole fact that
> we are having this discussion would go against that.
>
> From what i've read in the community, lots of people would have no
> problems helping out maintaining pac
On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 08:50:49AM +0300, Eray Aslan wrote:
> Just replying randomly.
>
> On 05.04.2010 04:33, Tobias Heinlein wrote:
> > I think this is a good starting point to get rid of the "some important
> > questions are too hard to answer" dilemma that can be implemented
> > relatively fas
only thing anyone is really concerned about; robbat2
has already laid claim to fortune-mod-gentoo-dev ;)
Later. It's been fun, it's been real, but it hasn't been real fun. :)
I'll be around #gentoo/#-dev.
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
t; You don't want me producing code for the project, trust me on that one. >>
>
Perhaps get involved in userrel then?
Plenty of ways to get involved without necessarily producing code
directly
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
mail. Are you trying to say releng was already
doing this and nobody knew about it, or that releng should've been asked
to approve this, or what? You're the only one getting territorial about
it, I'm curious as to what the real issue is.
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
there for flaming other
> > devs.
> >
> > There was a time when we used to suspend devs for doing that.
> Sadly we don't suspend developers for extended history of QA violations.
>
Not true, unfortunately these problems seem to very rarely get
communicated to devrel...
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
he fact that this is a source-based distro, have to be accorded a
> slightly higher level of respect and regard.
>
Haven't been to #gentoo lately have you?
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
7;t assign them to end users who
> originally submitted the maintainer-wanted ebuilds?
>
And while we're talking collateral damage, could the Sunrise folks
please make sure it's abundantly clear that users shouldn't ask for
support in #gentoo after installing any Sunrise
> ~tcort
I do not object to the concept of ebuilds in overlays.
I do very much object to using any gentoo.org infrastructure or
subdomains to do so. If someone is going to tackle that, it should be
done outside of Gentoo proper. We don't need to be stuck maintaining and
supporting a
opers can work with (else the council can intervene
and fix the problem with new management).
If the primary package manager is controlled by Gentoo, we exercise
somewhat more control over the direction it takes in the first place
and can avoid ever needing to fork or deal with any potentially poor
upst
would be inappropriate to let an outside
entity steer our primary package manager.
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
eep your fingers off of my bugs. Understood?
>
Is this kind of approach really necessary here? This doesn't seem like
an emotional issue from where I'm sitting...
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 09:38:17AM -0500, Daniel Goller wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 08:41:31AM -0500, Daniel Goller wrote:
> >> inviting community) and why you think stricter test make for
re inviting or not, anybody can contribute.
They don't need to be @gentoo.org to do so. What we really need is to
focus more on those outside contributions.
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> implementation.
> If it sounds like a good one, then there is a vote and things proceed. I like
> progress.
Well, I think we all like progress. The council votes on GLEPs; I don't
see how extending voting to include _all of Gentoo_ would speed things
up or contribute to progress... this is why we elect representatives.
Overall I think this would be a regression.
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 12:30:29PM +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 11:50:18AM +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> >
> >>I feel really confused. Have you read the logs of the recent affair?
> >>Devrel *hadn't* requested anyth
already been resolved even if I did -- including
current devrel/infra relations since it's no longer considered part of
the proposed code of conduct :)
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:27:39PM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Jon Portnoy wrote: [Mon Apr 03 2006, 06:52:33PM CDT]
> > On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 07:35:52PM -0400, Aron Griffis wrote:
> > > Clearly this sentence states that Infra has usurped the suspension
> > > proces
is.
Humor can be funny sometimes
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 02:10:20AM +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 01:40:59AM +0200, Danny van Dyk wrote:
> >
> >>This is how it has been handled so far except in the ciaranm incident. This
> >>is
> >>how I
>
You mean the broken policy.xml everyone wants to replace?
I agree some of the wording should be altered, but I do think it's
sensible for infra to cover when devrel falls on its rear.
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
so
often & so hard before handling this particular incident. I don't think
it's so unreasonable to have backup plans for preserving Gentoo when
devrel cannot respond in a timely manner
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
time soon because ports is archaic at best
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Well we could say "meta operating system" if we wanted to be really
stupid, or we could just admit that we don't have to make a bunch of
anal terminology nerds happy and continue on using sane naming
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
customer
n : someone who pays for goods or services [syn: {client}]
When did we start selling Gentoo?
(Admittedly we sell optical media via the Gentoo Store, but the software
is still free-as-in-beer)
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
and unpack a portage
> rescue tarball then I would think that the actual pain would be minimal.
^^^
Haven't been to #gentoo lately have you? :)
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
No, he's saying you're talking out of your behind. And you continue to
do so
Gentoo projects have their own areas of responsibility, the GDP's area
of responsibility is the GDP, devrel's area of responsibility is
developers, infra's area of responsibility is infrastructure.
Thank you, come again
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
simply because they're
unmaintained is no good. Unmaintained and broken is a different story.
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
solution is rather to have a devrel liaison inside the QA team (or
> the other way around). These are not closed groups.
Agreed.
We don't need a second devrel, rather we need to make sure QA isn't
ignored by devrel
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
7;s stop button also kick the apparently responsible
individual out of the building? Otherwise this analogy would work better
if applied to ebuilds and the maintainership thereof, not developers and
their CVS access.
(And on another note, Saturn? Known for quality? Bwahahahah... err. :) )
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
dn't) devrel should continue to be responsible for
disciplinary issues including repeated QA violations reported by the QA
team
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
se drobbins
set it up'
Recruitment, conflict resolution, disciplinary issues. I.e., 'managing
developers.'
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
t; >
> > PLEASE AVOID REFRAINING SUCH NONSENSE
> >
> > point taken, working on it, don't impair our productivity more than that.
> >
> > thank you
>
> The only devs I've seen complain are yourself and Jon Portnoy. Nobody is
> forcing you to re
On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 11:31:30AM -0400, Nathan L. Adams wrote:
>
> I really am curious here:
>
> a) What are the team leads spending most of their time on?
Hopefully not reading this thread
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 03:45:49PM +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
>
> > not everyone uses echangelog
> [snip]
> > it does, but not everyone uses echangelog
>
> Why not?
>
Because I don't want to. :)
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
inced that not having every bug resolution reviewed
every time is a problem, maybe you should start there :)
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 12:00:50PM -0400, Nathan L. Adams wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 10:54:46AM -0400, Nathan L. Adams wrote:
> >
> > So when can we discuss the salaries you're
, right? This process would just encourage more peer
> review, right? And one of the biggest strengths of F/OSS is PEER
> REVIEW!!
>
So when can we discuss the salaries you're going to pay the team leads
to waste fairly significant quantities of time staring over everybody's
shoulder? 8)
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 11:59:26PM -0700, Anthony Gorecki wrote:
> On Monday, July 04, 2005 11:19 pm, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > I am wondering why we have anonymous trolls on this mailing list.
>
> This is a public mailing list that doesn't use message filters.
>
I am
ed on -core and are trolling for a decent response here.
>
> Not being privy to -core either, I am wondering about the apparently
> hypocritical stance being taken on this issue.
I am wondering why we have anonymous trolls on this mailing list.
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
So the fact that the forums are moderated means that anything anybody
ever posts to the forums anywhere is _the_ Gentoo opinion?
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
en
> described by Daniel Robbins as being a "freak" (see his articles on
> making your own distro on ibm.com).
I think before posting you should perhaps take a step back and think:
"Am I making myself look like a bigger asshat than the other guy?"
Please try to refra
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 01:01:57PM +0200, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> On 6/28/05, Jon Portnoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Developers have CVS access; take the ebuild quiz and you're a developer,
> > take the staff quiz (the eight-question quiz some mods apparently d
ly matter you if we are called developers instead of staff?
>
Yes. You don't develop anything
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 01:00:21PM +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 June 2005 12:48, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > AFAIK they still plan to go through devrel, just add a forums person to
> > the recruiters team so existing recruiters aren't flood
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 06:48:51AM -0400, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 12:28:20PM +0200, Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 12:19:34PM +0200, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> > > > I still don't see *WHY* you should be different from us. If
they can add their other folks as needed. I don't see any need for the
'all or nothing' approach. Frankly I don't see any harm in people not
being totally clear on which mods are "staff" and which aren't (what
practical difference does it make?)
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
gt; Do I have to quit saying that I think that's wrong? No thanks. You are
> the only group that will make new devs apart from devrel. I still don't
> see why you should deserve a different treatment.
>
AFAIK they still plan to go through devrel, just add a forums person to
xample is kinda bogus. Assuming you don't turn it on I'd have to say the only
way it'd get turned on is if your system is already compromised
--
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 02:00:57PM +0200, Krzysiek Pawlik wrote:
> Jon Portnoy wrote:
> >>Symlink? If MIT == MetaKit, then:
> ^^
> >>ln -s MIT MetaKit
> > I don't know about this specific case but generally speaking licenses
> &g
taKit, then:
> ln -s MIT MetaKit
>
I don't know about this specific case but generally speaking licenses
that're similar in language and intent have very small (often cosmetic)
differences; if there is even the slightest difference it (legally)
qualifies as a differen
bal one.
>
> You are correct. However, it might be necessary to patch something that
> won't compile with icc, but does compile with gcc. I think this is the
> primary reason for the icc USE flag.
>
Yes, it is. As far as I know the icc USE flag doesn't actually change
I've resigned the devrel lead position; dmwaters will be filling it. I'm
too unglued lately to deal with silly crap, and frankly Deedra's been
doing the vast majority of devrel managing for a long time anyway.
I'll be sticking around in devrel to maintain the quiz and prov
56 matches
Mail list logo
