On 1/16/14 8:59 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Karsten Loesing
> wrote:
> [...]
>> (Let me know if you prefer this review to happen in a ticket rather than
>> here.)
>>
>
> Thanks, Karsten! I think it should ideally be a ticket?
Sure. I created #10645 for this.
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
[...]
> (Let me know if you prefer this review to happen in a ticket rather than
> here.)
>
Thanks, Karsten! I think it should ideally be a ticket?
--
Nick
___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@list
On 1/6/14 6:04 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:56 AM, Karsten Loesing
> wrote:
>> [Re-sending, because my first attempt apparently got lost somewhere.
>> Apologies if gets found and this is now a duplicate.]
>>
>>
>> Hi devs, hi dir-spec.txt authors,
> [...]
>> Would you acc
On 1/6/14 7:58 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:56 AM, Karsten Loesing
> wrote:
>> [Re-sending, because my first attempt apparently got lost somewhere.
>> Apologies if gets found and this is now a duplicate.]
>>
>>
>> Hi devs, hi dir-spec.txt authors,
>>
>> when I reviewed the
On 1/6/14 6:04 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:56 AM, Karsten Loesing
> wrote:
>> [Re-sending, because my first attempt apparently got lost somewhere.
>> Apologies if gets found and this is now a duplicate.]
>>
>>
>> Hi devs, hi dir-spec.txt authors,
> [...]
>> Would you acc
> Rationale: It is much more difficult to review patches that move and
> edit than patches which only move things.
I hate to +1 threads but I was thinking the same when this was first
proposed. I read all control-spec and dir-spec commits to determine if
they impact Stem. Making reformatting chang
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:56 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
> [Re-sending, because my first attempt apparently got lost somewhere.
> Apologies if gets found and this is now a duplicate.]
>
>
> Hi devs, hi dir-spec.txt authors,
>
> when I reviewed the open proposals related to the directory protocol, I
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:56 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
> [Re-sending, because my first attempt apparently got lost somewhere.
> Apologies if gets found and this is now a duplicate.]
>
>
> Hi devs, hi dir-spec.txt authors,
[...]
> Would you accept patches making these changes?
I'm okay with re-or
> For example, status opinions (proposal 147)...
Hi Karsten. Just looked at 147 to figure out the context for
overhauling the dir-spec and I'm curious about if we really need a new
document type for this. I'm not clear from the proposal - which
problem are we trying to solve?
1. Relays publish th
[Re-sending, because my first attempt apparently got lost somewhere.
Apologies if gets found and this is now a duplicate.]
Hi devs, hi dir-spec.txt authors,
when I reviewed the open proposals related to the directory protocol, I
wondered how to integrate the proposed changes into dir-spec.txt.
10 matches
Mail list logo