Lance Albertson wrote:
> Alec Warner wrote:
>> Stuart Herbert wrote:
>>> On 9/11/06, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Uhm, web-apps has been CCed on the bug since the beginning. Last time I
asked, noone wanted to touch the FUBARed ebuild, IIRC. :)
>>> The package was masked without Ch
Alec Warner wrote:
> Stuart Herbert wrote:
>> On 9/11/06, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Uhm, web-apps has been CCed on the bug since the beginning. Last time I
>>> asked, noone wanted to touch the FUBARed ebuild, IIRC. :)
>>
>> The package was masked without Christel (on behalf of QA) po
On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 17:10 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Now why does it not surprise me that you of all people are encouraging
> people to complain about Christel? Is there something you'd like to get
> out in the open?
>
I've been watching you spew for a while. When are you going to get ov
On 9/11/06, Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm more than happy for you to take Drupal instead of me :)
However, is there any reason that the main drupal ebuild cannot stay in
portage?
No reason at all, that I know of.
Drupal's a package I can't really work on; I work for a company that
On Monday 11 September 2006 14:07, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> I have new ebuilds for drupal, and a number of modules (I think I got
> up to 'f') locally. I'll get them into the webapps overlay, so that
> folks can test them, and help out.
I'm more than happy for you to take Drupal instead of me :)
H
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 11:01:02 -0400 Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Stuart Herbert wrote:
| > On 9/11/06, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >> Uhm, web-apps has been CCed on the bug since the beginning. Last
| >> time I asked, noone wanted to touch the FUBARed
On 11/09/06, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 11:01:02 -0400 Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Stuart Herbert wrote:
| > On 9/11/06, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >> Uhm, web-apps has been CCed on the bug since the beginning. Last
| >> time I asked, n
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 11:01:02 -0400 Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Stuart Herbert wrote:
| > On 9/11/06, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >> Uhm, web-apps has been CCed on the bug since the beginning. Last
| >> time I asked, noone wanted to touch the FUBARed ebuild, IIRC. :)
| >
| >
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 21:25 +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
> progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and unless
> someone jumps up to fix the outstanding issues will be removed in 30
> days.
Er, as someon
On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 11:01 -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
> Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > On 9/11/06, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Uhm, web-apps has been CCed on the bug since the beginning. Last time I
> >> asked, noone wanted to touch the FUBARed ebuild, IIRC. :)
> >
> > The package was mas
Stuart Herbert wrote:
On 9/11/06, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Uhm, web-apps has been CCed on the bug since the beginning. Last time I
asked, noone wanted to touch the FUBARed ebuild, IIRC. :)
The package was masked without Christel (on behalf of QA) posting an
advance warning of their
On 9/10/06, Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alec Warner wrote:
upstream for that reason
Upstream sucks badly here.
us because we haven't a tool like the one BaSS wrote for the ebooks.
Such a tool would deal with many modules, but not all of them. Some
modules require additional dep
On 9/11/06, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Uhm, web-apps has been CCed on the bug since the beginning. Last time I
asked, noone wanted to touch the FUBARed ebuild, IIRC. :)
The package was masked without Christel (on behalf of QA) posting an
advance warning of their actions. That's not t
Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On 9/9/06, Christel Dahlskjaer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
>> progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and unless
>> someone jumps up to fix the outstanding issues will be removed in 30
On 9/9/06, Christel Dahlskjaer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and unless
someone jumps up to fix the outstanding issues will be removed in 30
days.
Why didn't you escalat
Alec Warner wrote:
> Jakub Moc wrote:
>> Upstream completely sucks and keeps changing the tarballs silently over
>> and over again, so the only solution to the above bug is to remove all
>> of the modules/themes/etc. from the ebuild.
>
> So which sucks, upstream or our unbending policy?
Changing
Alec Warner wrote:
>
> So which sucks, upstream or our unbending policy?
upstream for that reason
us because we haven't a tool like the one BaSS wrote for the ebooks.
lu
--
Luca Barbato
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Jakub Moc wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 21:28:10 +0100 Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> | On Saturday 09 September 2006 21:25, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
>> | > Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen
>> | > no progress in resolving it
On Saturday 09 September 2006 22:34, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Upstream completely sucks and keeps changing the tarballs silently over
> and over again, so the only solution to the above bug is to remove all
> of the modules/themes/etc. from the ebuild.
Nothing wrong with that - most modules, themes for
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 21:28:10 +0100 Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | On Saturday 09 September 2006 21:25, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> | > Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen
> | > no progress in resolving it. It has now been packag
On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 21:28:10 +0100 Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Saturday 09 September 2006 21:25, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
| > Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen
| > no progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and
| > unless someone
On Saturday 09 September 2006 20:25, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
> progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and unless
> someone jumps up to fix the outstanding issues will be removed in 30
> days.
Hi.
shillel
On Saturday 09 September 2006 21:25, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
> progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and unless
> someone jumps up to fix the outstanding issues will be removed in 30
> days.
Unless anyo
On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 12:44:51PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 12:32 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> >> Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> >>> Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
> >>> progress in resolving i
Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 12:32 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
>>> Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
>>> progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and unless
>>> someone jumps up to fix the ou
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 12:32 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> > Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
> > progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and unless
> > someone jumps up to fix the outstanding issues will be remov
Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
> progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and unless
> someone jumps up to fix the outstanding issues will be removed in 30
> days.
In the future, could you please CC the maintaine
Drupal has had QA bug #98542 open for over a year now, and has seen no
progress in resolving it. It has now been package.masked, and unless
someone jumps up to fix the outstanding issues will be removed in 30
days.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
28 matches
Mail list logo
