On Monday 12 June 2006 17:15, Brian Harring wrote:
> B) council
> outcome tomorrow (no point in changing it till they've weighed in on
> the whole enchilada).
not really
it makes people dropping in their own stuff easier and doesnt adversely affect
the portage tree in any way
-mike
pgpouPWaF83
On Monday 12 June 2006 16:58, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> I am also aware that this falls roughly under what the Council was
> asked to discuss in its June meeting, but since that seems to have not
> happened, I'm bringing it up anyway, since I would like to get
> something done here.
we meet Jun 15t
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:42:16 -0400
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please postpone any such changes, if approved, until at least July, as
> we will be doing a snapshot before then, and I would prefer not having
> to spend our entire release cycle just fixing possible problems from
>
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 14:15 -0700, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 09:58:01PM +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> > Many things were discussed in the last round of this thread (Paludis
> > and Profiles, in case anyone missed it), and many useful points raised.
> > One of these, which see
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 21:58 +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> Comments?
Please postpone any such changes, if approved, until at least July, as
we will be doing a snapshot before then, and I would prefer not having
to spend our entire release cycle just fixing possible problems from
these changes.
-
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 23:09:38 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you can spot those issues and fix them w/out rush on package
> mantainers, no problems at all.
I was assuming that they would be treated more or less as minor QA
issues are currently.
> PS: there is a formal spec abo
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 23:07:34 +0200 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Monday 12 June 2006 22:58, Stephen Bennett wrote:
| > I would like to think that this proposal addresses most of the
| > concerns raised in the last thread -- it implies nothing about
| > support for any
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 09:58:01PM +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> Many things were discussed in the last round of this thread (Paludis
> and Profiles, in case anyone missed it), and many useful points raised.
> One of these, which seems to have been largely missed in amongst the
> other noise, for
Stephen Bennett wrote:
> Many things were discussed in the last round of this thread (Paludis
> and Profiles, in case anyone missed it), and many useful points raised.
> One of these, which seems to have been largely missed in amongst the
> other noise, forms the basis of this proposal. It is in so
On Monday 12 June 2006 22:58, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> I would like to think that this proposal addresses most of the concerns
> raised in the last thread -- it implies nothing about support for any
> other package manager, and introduces nothing that could cause problems
> for Portage users, while
Many things were discussed in the last round of this thread (Paludis
and Profiles, in case anyone missed it), and many useful points raised.
One of these, which seems to have been largely missed in amongst the
other noise, forms the basis of this proposal. It is in some ways more
and in some ways l
11 matches
Mail list logo
