On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 13:06 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Huh?
>
> I was using it as an example of something that I would not be interested
> in seeing in *my* tree since I wouldn't ever be able to attend. What
> did you think I meant by it. Did I at any point say that the UK dev
> meets are
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 23:44 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > this, then I change my opinion on supporting this proposal, as I surely
> > don't give a damn about some dev meet in the UK that I would never be
> > able to attend and *definitely* don't want that *shoved* down my throat
> > by the tree.
Having organised several Gentoo UK meetings I would like to be advised
if anyone has a problem; especially if they dont come or have no idea
when, where or what they are.
George ProwseOn 11/18/05, Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Chris,Sorry for the delay in replying. Having a few rel
Hi Chris,
Sorry for the delay in replying. Having a few reliability problems with
my broadband atm.
On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 08:59 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> I thought your proposal was to get critical information to our users,
> not force every user to read that $dev is going to be in $count
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 10:25:33 +0100
Thierry Carrez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:37:15 + Stuart Herbert
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > | For example, there's no real reason why GLSA's couldn't been
> > delivered | via this at some point (alth
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 22:34 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 10:26 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > If users are interested in non-critical information, there's already a
> > mechanism in place for them to get such things. They can join the
> > mailing lists. Do we not alrea
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:37:15 + Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | For example, there's no real reason why GLSA's couldn't been delivered
> | via this at some point (although I'd prefer a "You have X amount of
> | security fixes to apply" type message adding
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:43:14 -0500 Dan Meltzer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| One usually adapts to unforseen problems, not ones that are known
| going into the project.
|
| Your suggestion is akin to buying a car that you know has bad tires, a
| bad alternator, a rusted body, and sundry other thing
One usually adapts to unforseen problems, not ones that are known
going into the project.
Your suggestion is akin to buying a car that you know has bad tires, a
bad alternator, a rusted body, and sundry other things wrong with it
for full price, and just planning on fixing when it actually breaks.
On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 10:26 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> If users are interested in non-critical information, there's already a
> mechanism in place for them to get such things. They can join the
> mailing lists. Do we not already have a gentoo-events list? We also
> have a gentoo-releng lis
On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 00:57 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:22 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > It seems to be your own quest to have the news *only*
> > delivered by portage.
>
> I thought I'd been very clear in the email that you've replied to that I
> support making
Stuart Herbert wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:22 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
It seems to be your own quest to have the news *only*
delivered by portage.
I thought I'd been very clear in the email that you've replied to that I
support making the news available via other ways. It's the ti
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:22 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> It seems to be your own quest to have the news *only*
> delivered by portage.
I thought I'd been very clear in the email that you've replied to that I
support making the news available via other ways. It's the timing that
I'm a bit wo
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 22:37 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > Things that should definitely be changed:
> > - Integration with existing systems:
> > This definitely should be a requirement for the GLEP to be considered
> > final. It doesn't prevent some thing being implemented sooner than
> > others
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:37:15 + Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| For example, there's no real reason why GLSA's couldn't been delivered
| via this at some point (although I'd prefer a "You have X amount of
| security fixes to apply" type message adding to emerge, and treating
| GLSAs
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:40 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
> I've already asked a similar question in another mail (in other
> context) without an answer, but how many news items do people believe
> will exist at any given time?
We won't know for certain until people start using it. I expect that
i
Marius Mauch wrote: [Fri Nov 11 2005, 11:40:53AM CST]
> Things that I'd like to be changed/I'm not completely sure about:
> - filtering of news items:
> I've already asked a similar question in another mail (in other
> context) without an answer, but how many news items do people believe
> will e
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:40:53 +0100 Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| I've already asked a similar question in another mail (in other
| context) without an answer, but how many news items do people believe
| will exist at any given time? Depending on the actual implementation
| it might be
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 00:58:14 +
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Feedback from people who have something useful to say would be very
> much welcomed, assuming of course that they've read the GLEP.
Things that I think are generally ok as is:
- news item format
- news item distributio
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 10:38 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:19:15 +0100
> Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 10-11-2005 21:33:48 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > > We need to establish *one* authoritative source of news. We can't
> > > do that if we simultaneously lau
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 04:52 +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:07:37 -0800 Mike Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > | What about something like "/etc/portage/news.read", which contains a
> > | single news file per line. Perhaps have support for something
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 21:33 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> My personal conclusion was that there is only one place where we can
> have any degree of certainty that we have the attention of 100% of the
> userbase - or as near as damn it. I believe that place is right beneath
> the message that tell
On Friday 11 November 2005 00:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:12:28 + Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
> | Should the GLEP explain how Portage will know how many unread news
> | items there are in /var/lib/gentoo/news? I couldn't spot where this
> | is covered
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Next draft will propose being able to append .read to a filename
> to mark it read without deleting it.
But don't use ".read", as it can be understood as both present tense
(imperative) and past tense. Better use something like ".seen".
Benno
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org m
On 11-11-2005 10:38:43 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
> No, the central repository certainly shouldn't be on the web (whatever
> that means in the first place), it has to be somewhere in CVS
> (easily accessible by all devs, though not necessarily in a direct way)
> and should be replicated to as many
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:19:15 +0100
Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10-11-2005 21:33:48 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > We need to establish *one* authoritative source of news. We can't
> > do that if we simultaneously launch several sources of news all at
> > once. We have to launch *one
On 10-11-2005 21:33:48 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> We need to establish *one* authoritative source of news. We can't do
> that if we simultaneously launch several sources of news all at once.
> We have to launch *one* service first, give the userbase time to adjust
> to that, and then start mak
Dan Meltzer wrote:
Forever.
Too long for the not infinite space in the server/mirror
Gentoo releases mean absolutely nothing, they do absolutely nothing.
Beside adding some profiles, deprecating and removing others, provide an
updated installation media...
The news should stay until th
Forever.
Gentoo releases mean absolutely nothing, they do absolutely nothing.
The news should stay until the upgrade occurs
On 11/10/05, Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:07:37 -0800 Mike Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > | What about s
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:07:37 -0800 Mike Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| What about something like "/etc/portage/news.read", which contains a
| single news file per line. Perhaps have support for something like
| "<=2006-01-01" in order to be able to manually mark date ran
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:07:37 -0800 Mike Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| What about something like "/etc/portage/news.read", which contains a
| single news file per line. Perhaps have support for something like
| "<=2006-01-01" in order to be able to manually mark date ranges as
| read.
Eh, yet a
On 11/10/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:12:28 + Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | Should the GLEP explain how Portage will know how many unread news
> | items there are in /var/lib/gentoo/news? I couldn't spot where this
> | is covered in
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:12:28 + Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Should the GLEP explain how Portage will know how many unread news
| items there are in /var/lib/gentoo/news? I couldn't spot where this
| is covered in the text, or in the example code.
Well, I was going to go with th
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 00:58 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Feedback from people who have something useful to say would be very much
> welcomed, assuming of course that they've read the GLEP.
Apologies if this has already been picked up by someone else in this
monster thread ;-)
Should the GLEP e
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 21:10 +0100, Grobian wrote:
> Users don't care about security[1], adminstrators do.
> Administrators don't care about breaking installations[2], users do.
That's the problem with sweeping generalisations they're just too
general to be of any value in a discussion.
> whi
An internation standard that utilizes an international language... hrm
On 11/7/05, Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 051107 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > 7 Nov 2005 15:12:20 -0500 Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I'm serious -- Gentoo should try to follow international standards
> >
051107 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> 7 Nov 2005 15:12:20 -0500 Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm serious -- Gentoo should try to follow international standards
> The format specified in GLEP 1 is an international standard.
> It's just not the same international standard that you're after.
I
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 15:12:20 -0500 Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| I'm serious -- Gentoo should try to follow international standards
The format specified in GLEP 1 is an international standard. It's just
not the same international standard that you're after.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo
On Monday 07 of November 2005 21:12 Philip Webb wrote:
> 051107 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> I'm serious -- Gentoo should try to follow international standards -- ,
> but have a (smile) to recognise it's a small point.
See the first line of the quotation :-P
Cheers,
-jkt
--
cd /local/pub && more be
On Monday 07 of November 2005 21:10 Grobian wrote:
> Our GLSAs are sent out exactly in the same way, but there is not a word
> on them in the GLEP, neither does anyone seem to care about them, while
> they seem to me at least ***VERY*** important, that is, much more
> important than a message about
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 21:10:35 +0100 Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| It is a well-known fact that removing seemingly useless background
| noise can cause relations between problems not to be recognised.
| Some users know that and hence would like to see all errata.
And, conveniently enough, the
051107 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> 7 Nov 2005 11:50:22 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Saturday 05 November 2005 01:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> ``Posted:``
>>> Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001).
>>> UTC time in ``hh-mm-ss +`` format may also
Daniel Ostrow wrote:
You are correct, there is no clear cut place for them to go...that's how
this thing got started in the first place. However why force users to
sign up for something which can't be appropriately filtered (installed
packages, keywords, use flags, profiles, etc.) when all of the
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 11:50:22 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Saturday 05 November 2005 01:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > ``Posted:``
| > Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001).
| > UTC time in ``hh-mm-ss +`` format may also be included. This
| > fi
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 09:41:04 +0100 Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Remember that there are packages in the tree that satisfy the
| preemptive requirement, since they simply die when trying to upgrade
| and a certain amount of prerequisites is not met. This prevents the
| user from losing data
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 11:50:22AM +0100, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> What about also allowing the -mm-dd format (with or without hyphens).
> Using English month names is not the most convenient for many people.
I would go as far as suggesting to make it a requirement to use an
ISO-8601 compliant
On Saturday 05 November 2005 01:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> ``Posted:``
> Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001). UTC
> time in ``hh-mm-ss +`` format may also be included. This field is
> mandatory.
What about also allowing the -mm-dd format (with or without hyp
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 09:56:35PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | Then what is the point of this GLEP? Instead, just warn people
> | through existing intrastructure, which is cheap from an engineering
> | perspective because everything is already there in place, and don't
> | think of implement
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 09:33:50 +0100 Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > | Which means you won't be able to satisfy your "preemptive"
| > | requirement.
| >
| > Not at all. You can warn users repeatedly, but there comes a point
| > when trying to warn them any further bec
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 13:58 +0100, Grobian wrote:
> A lot Gentoo users I know read gentoo-announce and the GWN.
But *many* more don't. That's what we learned from the Apache package
refresh, and what we've also learned from the PHP5 work.
> Works fine for me.
What works for you is irrelevant t
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Which means you won't be able to satisfy your "preemptive"
| requirement.
Not at all. You can warn users repeatedly, but there comes a point when
trying to warn them any further becomes futile.
Then what is the point of this GLEP? Instead, just warn people through
ex
On Sunday 06 November 2005 02:57, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 22:18:14 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | > The following headers are used for filtering. If none of these
> | > headers are specified, the news item is displayed for all users.
> | > Otherwise, the news item is
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 14:29:31 -0600 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| > Signing elsewhere isn't mandatory yet.
|
| Deal with it ;)
In order to deal with it, I'd also have to come up with a solution to
distributing keys for Gentoo developers. That's a separate issue which
must be addressed
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 23:32:19 +0100 Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| I was referring to the item-name. It is defined to allow "-", whild
| the fields are also separated with "-". Hence I suggested to allow
| "_" in the item-name instead of "-" to avoid (possible) problems when
| parsing the fi
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 17:24:14 -0500 Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| > Consistency with GLEPs.
|
| Sorry, that doesn't mean anything:
| could you offer something which makes more sense ?
GLEP 1 mandates date headers in that format.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Anti-XML, anti-new
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Apart from that this point seems to repeat much of the previous one,
| it introduces a new unfounded claim (users do read, but now too late)
Read the linked forums thread and all will become clear.
the forums thread advocates against the new unfounded claim, IMHO.
|
051105 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> 5 Nov 2005 14:24:01 -0500 Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 051105 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> > News Item File Format
>> ...
>> > The news item will be named in the form
>> > ``-mm-dd-item-name.en.txt``
>> ...
>> > News Item Headers
>> ...
>> > Date
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 05:45:35PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > News items may be signed using GPG. If this is done, a detached
> | > signature should be used.
> |
> | I'd argue for must be, personally. A bogus news item claiming to be
> | from portage devs, telling users to change their
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 14:24:01 -0500 Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| 051105 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > News Item File Format
| ...
| > The news item will be named in the form
| > ``-mm-dd-item-name.en.txt``
| ...
| > News Item Headers
| ...
| > Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` f
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 14:13:32 -0500 Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > Hrm. Append '.read' to the filename?
|
| chmod -r filename
Makes writing clients a pain in the ass.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Anti-XML, anti-newbie conspiracy)
Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web
051105 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
...
> News Item File Format
...
> The news item will be named in the form ``-mm-dd-item-name.en.txt``
...
> News Item Headers
...
> Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001).
Why the change in date format ? Let's use the proper intern
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 17:53 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 05:43:12 -0600 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | Your example readers delete from the news directory, yet I'd expect
> | that's not going to be desirable for all setups- nor is leaving the
> | news item in
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 17:58:40 + (UTC) Ferris McCormick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| I can't resist. I think you mean '"not" after "system,"':
| "...*before* they break the user's system, not after "
Uh oh, I think I finally cracked. Now I'm crazzyyy!!!
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 11:28:33 +0100 Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > Preemptive
| > Users should be told of changes *before* they break the user's
| > system, after the damage has already been done
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 22:18:14 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| > A more reliable way of getting news of critical updates out to
| > users is required to avoid repeats of the various recent upgrade
| > debacles.
|
| Examples of the "recent upgrade debacles" aren't needed, but you
| sho
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 05:43:12 -0600 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Your example readers delete from the news directory, yet I'd expect
| that's not going to be desirable for all setups- nor is leaving the
| news item in the news directory, and having it flagged every sync by
| emerge a
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 11:34:23 + Lisa Seelye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| The first is the method of delivery: Through 'emerge sync', which
| requires that users run this on a regular basis to receive relevant
| news. Further, this process can take a very long time and transfers a
| relatively
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 05:24:51 -0600 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Drop the lightweight bit and merge it into multiple delivery. You're
| after lightweight _default_, which is fine, but the phrasing is a bit
| screwed.
Hrm, I don't see those as contradictory. There's a requirement tha
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 11:28:33 +0100 Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > Preemptive
| > Users should be told of changes *before* they break the user's
| > system, after the damage has already been done.
|
| style suggestion for unambigous interpretation:
| perhaps a "because if applied afterw
"Bryan ���" wrote:
Even if you don't realise that this will be a big help for many users or
you just don't think those users deserver any help (not sure which one
it is tbh) - you might at least consider the fact that only having to
push news about major / critical cha
On Saturday 05 November 2005 22:24, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 10:18:14PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > > ``Display-If-Installed:``
> > > Â Â A dependency atom or simple package name (for example,
> > >   `` > > the   package specified installed, the news item should
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 10:18:14PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > ``Display-If-Installed:``
> > ?? ?? A dependency atom or simple package name (for example,
> > ?? ?? `` > ?? ?? package specified installed, the news item should be displayed.
> >
> > ``Display-If-Keyword:``
> > ?? ?? A keyword [#gl
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 01:58:00PM +0100, Grobian wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I disagree. A lot Gentoo users I know read gentoo-announce and the GWN.
> For me it works quite well if I see a message with a warning on
> something. I can quickly find it back if I am in need for it. I wo
> A more reliable way of getting news of critical updates out to users is
> required to avoid repeats of the various recent upgrade debacles.
Examples of the "recent upgrade debacles" aren't needed, but you should at
least state some of the outcomes that occurred, whether it be unscheduled
downt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we were only aiming at a certain group of people there would be no
need to change anything. The apache announcements reached lots of users
but still left a large chunk of users in the dark. Moving the news to
-announce or some RSS feed wouldn't change anything as the b
On Saturday 05 of November 2005 12:34 Lisa Seelye wrote:
> The first is the method of delivery: Through 'emerge sync', which
> requires that users run this on a regular basis to receive relevant
> news. Further, this process can take a very long time and transfers a
> relatively large amount of d
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 12:29:28PM +0100, Grobian wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >You must not have read the [#forums-whining]_ reference as that makes it
> >quite clear that existing methods isn't adequate. Even if you think the
> >apache maintainers made lots of mistakes you can't really fau
Additional issue/question...
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 12:58:14AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> 6. Portage filters the news item and, if it is relevant, installs it in a
>special location to be read by a news item reader. Messages are also
>displayed to inform the user that news is availab
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 00:58 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Feedback from people who have something useful to say would be very much
> welcomed, assuming of course that they've read the GLEP.
It is written in the GLEP (Requirements):
No user monitoring required
It has already been demonstrat
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You must not have read the [#forums-whining]_ reference as that makes it
quite clear that existing methods isn't adequate. Even if you think the
apache maintainers made lots of mistakes you can't really fault us for
not trying to get the news of config changes out to all
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 12:58:14AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Lightweight
> It is not reasonable to expect all users to have an MTA, web browser,
> email
> client, cron daemon or text processing suite available on their system.
>
> Multiple delivery method support
> Some users
Jan Kundrát wrote:
On Saturday 05 of November 2005 11:28 Grobian wrote:
Remember that it is easy
to say here that users don't read what's on their consoles as well, as
in post emerge messages etc. So make sure you deal with it upfront, why
you think now it *will* work.
"Emerge messages" are
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 11:28:33AM +0100, Grobian wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >Motivation
> >==
> >
> >There are currently several ways of getting news out to our users, none of
> >them
> >particularly effective:
>
> This assumes the following ways are really ineffective, something
On Saturday 05 of November 2005 11:28 Grobian wrote:
> Remember that it is easy
> to say here that users don't read what's on their consoles as well, as
> in post emerge messages etc. So make sure you deal with it upfront, why
> you think now it *will* work.
"Emerge messages" are usually hidden b
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Motivation
==
There are currently several ways of getting news out to our users, none of them
particularly effective:
This assumes the following ways are really ineffective, something which
you don't prove or give any reason for. Hence it's eligable for another
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 20:44:13 -0500 Dan Meltzer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >``Content-Type:``
| > Must be ``text/plain``. Mandatory.
|
| Why have this header at all then?
Forwards compatibility.
| > ``Posted:``
| > Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001).
| > UTC time
>``Content-Type:``
> Must be ``text/plain``. Mandatory.
Why have this header at all then?
> ``Posted:``
> Date of posting, in ``dd-mmm-`` format (e.g. 14-Aug-2001). UTC time in
> ``hh-mm-ss +`` format may also be included. This field is mandatory.
How will prescendse be handled if
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005 00:58:14 +
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Feedback from people who have something useful to say would be very
> much welcomed, assuming of course that they've read the GLEP.
I think you might be missing a 'not' from the first Requirements
section. Unless you'r
88 matches
Mail list logo
