Jakub Moc wrote:
> So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish!
Sorry to see you go, man! You were one of the most hard working devs out
there.
Your contribution will not be forgotten.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 06:01:46AM +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
>
> Whoever is in charge, kindly change my bugzilla account to the email
> address this mail is sent from and take care of the setting the
> bugzilla privs accordingly. There's still a couple of bugs I've filed
> and maybe someone will tak
On 4/17/07, Bryan Østergaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 06:01:46AM +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
>
> Whoever is in charge, kindly change my bugzilla account to the email
> address this mail is sent from and take care of the setting the
> bugzilla privs accordingly. There's still
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 06:01, Jakub Moc wrote:
> So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish!
I'm sad to see you go but I can't say that I don't understand you. It has been
great having you shove security bugs our way when needed.
Thank you for your work and best of luck with your future endeavours.
Jakub Moc kirjoitti:
> On 4/17/07, Bryan Østergaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 06:01:46AM +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
>> >
>> > Whoever is in charge, kindly change my bugzilla account to the email
>> > address this mail is sent from and take care of the setting the
>> > bugzi
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 16:01:46 Jakub Moc wrote:
> So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> I'm therefore resigning from this project.
I would be grateful if somebody could refer me to the arch
Christopher Sawtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tuesday 17 April 2007 16:01:46 Jakub Moc wrote:
> > So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> > brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any
> > more. I'm therefore resigning from this project.
> I would
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 10:28:21PM +1200, Christopher Sawtell wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 April 2007 16:01:46 Jakub Moc wrote:
> > So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> > brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> > I'm therefore resigning f
Petteri Räty wrote:
>
> You can still set a watch to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Better:
you can take your account back in 2 weeks, in the mean time please have
a vacation, think about ways to not get too annoyed by people in dummy
mode (like me and others from time to time) and please don't be angry
beca
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 22:32:34 Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Christopher Sawtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Tuesday 17 April 2007 16:01:46 Jakub Moc wrote:
> > > So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> > > brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this proje
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 23:42:36 Wernfried Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 11:35:01PM +1200, Christopher Sawtell wrote:
> > I just hope we are not going to get overly 'precious' about this CoC
> > thing, which btw, I note contains the colloquial phrase 'If you screw
> > up ...'. That sort of
Sad to see you go. In my pov you really did a good job.
I hope the ones in charge of bugzilla come with a solution to this.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 11:19 +1200, Christopher Sawtell wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 April 2007 01:10:20 Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> [ ... ]
>
> > Yeah, ulimit won't do it. We hit this issue with mimedefang, actually.
> > Our problem is that the kernel is doing the limiting. We ended up
> > having to spl
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 11:54:31PM +1200, Christopher Sawtell wrote:
> You might find reading the Debian, and particularly, the Ubuntu Code of
> Conduct a worth-while execise.
> http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct
> http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Yeah, that one has already
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 01:34:02PM +0100, Steve Long wrote:
>
> > I'm pretty sure it will be actually no loss for Gentoo, since those
> > folks that contributed to my retirement far outweigh the benefit I
> > could ever possibly be to this project. This can be clearly evidenced
> > by their long-l
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 11:35:01PM +1200, Christopher Sawtell wrote:
> I just hope we are not going to get overly 'precious' about this CoC thing,
> which btw, I note contains the colloquial phrase 'If you screw up ...'.
> That sort of lazy slang language has no place in the official document set
On 4/17/07, Bryan Østergaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And just to be even more clear about this - his bad behaviour isn't only
about language but also about his actions on bugzilla such as
reassigning bugs without trying to contact maintainers first,
reassigning bugs against the maintainers exp
Actually please exclude the KDE project and its herds from your patch.
I'd prefer to handle that manually.
Thanks again!
On 4/17/07, Robin H. Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 04:10:14PM +0300, Petteri R??ty wrote:
> I made a patch to remove all retired developers from
Ioannis Aslanidis kirjoitti:
> Actually please exclude the KDE project and its herds from your patch.
> I'd prefer to handle that manually.
>
> Thanks again!
>
Sure. Just do it this week and it will not show up when I commit it next
week.
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP d
On 4/17/07, Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jakub Moc wrote:
> So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> I'm therefore resigning from this project.
>
OMG NO! Please reconsider.
> I'm pret
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 09:04:39AM -0500, Jeffrey Gardner wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jakub Moc wrote:
> > So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> > brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> > I'm theref
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 04:10:14PM +0300, Petteri R??ty wrote:
> I made a patch to remove all retired developers from the project pages.
> If anyone doesn't object I will commit this next week.
Removing the tags is fine, but please don't remove the
tags. They show who created the page - and there
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jakub Moc wrote:
> So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> I'm therefore resigning from this project.
It was recently said that if you had been the
Jakub Moc wrote:
> So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> I'm therefore resigning from this project.
>
OMG NO! Please reconsider.
> I'm pretty sure it will be actually no loss for Gentoo, sin
I made a patch to remove all retired developers from the project pages.
If anyone doesn't object I will commit this next week.
Regards,
Petteri
? retired.patch
Index: en/base/alpha/index.xml
===
RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo/xml/htdoc
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 07:43 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Jakub Moc wrote:
> > So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> > brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> > I'm therefore resigning from this project.
>
> While there are situation
On 4/17/07, Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> holding developers to higher
> standards is completely in line with the council wishes I believe.
Indeed. I've noticed the high standards being pushed by devrel quite a
couple of times, such as in [1]. So Bret, I sincerely hope you'll get
your d
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 09:04 -0500, Jeffrey Gardner wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jakub Moc wrote:
> > So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> > brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> > I'm therefore res
Bryan Østergaard wrote:
On the contrary we warn people about not behaving badly and if that
doesn't help despite many warnings and complaints being filed we finally
take to firmer action which is exactly what have happened in this case.
Regards,
Bryan Østergaard
Sorry, I am going to have to
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 04:10:14PM +0300, Petteri R??ty wrote:
>> I made a patch to remove all retired developers from the project pages.
>> If anyone doesn't object I will commit this next week.
> Removing the tags is fine, but please don't remove the
> tags. They show
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 06:01:46 +0200
"Jakub Moc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> I'm therefore resigning from this project.
I'm sorry to see you go. I'm perso
I hope I won't forget! :)
On 4/17/07, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ioannis Aslanidis kirjoitti:
> Actually please exclude the KDE project and its herds from your patch.
> I'd prefer to handle that manually.
>
> Thanks again!
>
Sure. Just do it this week and it will not show up when I
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 16:10 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> I made a patch to remove all retired developers from the project pages.
> If anyone doesn't object I will commit this next week.
Feel free to commit any hardened or embedded corrections you have
anytime you become aware of them.
Thanks.
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:31:00 +0300
Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 06:01:46 +0200
> "Jakub Moc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> > brand new CoC,
Graphicsmagick is a fork of imagemagick but have been mostly inactive
the past 18 months. It's being removed due to inactive upstream and
several outstanding security issues (all the imagemagick security bugs
also apply to graphicsmagick).
The obvious replacement is imagemagick.
Regards,
Bryan Øs
On 17/04/07, Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 06:01:46 +0200
"Jakub Moc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So Since devrel has been so kind and suspended me, based on our
> brand new CoC, I don't feel any need to stay on this project any more.
> I'm therefore resign
I would like to take this time to note and re-affirm the proper bug
assignment policy and have it noted somewhere officially in Gentoo Policy.
Bugs that are created for the purpose of getting arches to keyword or
stabilize a particular package should initially be assigned to the
herd/maintainer of
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 14:56:58 -0400
Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to take this time to note and re-affirm the proper bug
> assignment policy and have it noted somewhere officially in Gentoo
> Policy.
>
> Bugs that are created for the purpose of getting arches to keyword
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 14:56:58 -0400
Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Once all but the last arch has keyworded said package, it is
> acceptable and proper for a bug wrangler and/or maintainer/herd to
> re-assign the bug to the last remaining arch and they remove that
> arch from CC. They s
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 14:56 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> I would like to take this time to note and re-affirm the proper bug
> assignment policy and have it noted somewhere officially in Gentoo Policy.
>
> Bugs that are created for the purpose of getting arches to keyword or
> stabilize a partic
Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 14:56 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>
>> I would like to take this time to note and re-affirm the proper bug
>> assignment policy and have it noted somewhere officially in Gentoo Policy.
>>
>> Bugs that are created for the purpose of getting arches to keywo
On 4/17/07, Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bugs that are created for the purpose of getting arches to keyword or
stabilize a particular package should initially be assigned to the
herd/maintainer of said package with all requested arches being CCed.
As a maintainer I have to deal wit
On Tuesday 17 April 2007 21:36, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Ned Ludd wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 14:56 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> >> I would like to take this time to note and re-affirm the proper bug
> >> assignment policy and have it noted somewhere officially in Gentoo
> >> Policy.
> >>
> >
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 09:50:26PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> On 4/17/07, Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Bugs that are created for the purpose of getting arches to keyword or
> >stabilize a particular package should initially be assigned to the
> >herd/maintainer of said package
Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> In my opinion the last architecture should also remove the old ebuild
> they have just made obsolete by stabling/keywording the new version,
> since they commit to the directory anyway.
This might be good, but also bad. I usually let the older stable version
linger in our
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 21:50 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> It would be cool to implement a [EMAIL PROTECTED] alias just to
> assign those bugs to so that we maintainers do not need to see them.
While you may not find them useful, there have been 3 recent occasions
of user requesting things get k
Steev Klimaszewski wrote: [Tue Apr 17 2007, 08:58:59AM CDT]
> Bryan Østergaard wrote:
>
> >On the contrary we warn people about not behaving badly and if that
> >doesn't help despite many warnings and complaints being filed we finally
> >take to firmer action which is exactly what have happened in
On 4/17/07, Bryan Østergaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not about how old the bugs are. Some action might very well be in
order on old bugs but you still have to work with the maintainer. If you
make a reasonable attempt at contacting the maintainer and don't get any
responses for say 2 week
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 23:19:14 +0200
"Jakub Moc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, you've miserably failed, you should have retired this guy long
> time ago before things went this far, since he obviously doesn't care
> about Gentoo users, but just about his territorial pissings. Instead,
> you've
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 10:44:09PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 23:19:14 +0200
> "Jakub Moc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sorry, you've miserably failed, you should have retired this guy long
> > time ago before things went this far, since he obviously doesn't care
> > abou
On 4/18/07, Bryan Østergaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now, I didn't set out to threaten him in any way but after 30 minutes
with no response to my question and even more angry devs demanding me to
solve this situation I had to do something to stop it. I personally
think trying to talk to the de
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> It would be cool to implement a [EMAIL PROTECTED] alias just to
> assign those bugs to so that we maintainers do not need to see them.
Or maybe implement new bugzilla keywords, like STABLEREQ and KEYWORDREQ
which would be add
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:12:26 +0200
From: Jeroen Roovers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [gentoo-core] [POLICY] Keywording/Stabilizing Bug
Assignment Policy
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:50:26 +0200
"Stefan Schweizer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As
Can you guys move all this garbage to the gentoo-devrel mailing list?
This is exactly the kind of discussion it exists for. This has nothing
to do with development.
Thanks,
Donnie
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Can you guys move all this garbage to the gentoo-devrel mailing list?
This is exactly the kind of discussion it exists for. This has nothing
to do with development.
Thanks,
Donnie
Consider this a request from me as well.
--taco
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On 4/17/07, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Can you guys move all this garbage to the gentoo-devrel mailing list?
This is exactly the kind of discussion it exists for. This has nothing
to do with development.
+1
Thanks,
Donnie
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Tuesday 17 April 2007, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Can you guys move all this garbage to the gentoo-devrel mailing list?
> This is exactly the kind of discussion it exists for. This has nothing
> to do with development.
hmm, that sounds peachy clean to me
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is
Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:50:26 +0200
> "Stefan Schweizer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As a maintainer I have to deal with many stable/keywording requests.
>> Those are bugs that generally hang around in my bugzilla queries and
>> fill my mailbox and I do not have any ability
Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on
Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:33:55 -0500:
> This sort of e-mail isn't particularly helpful[.] You might get better
> results if you [...] ask for clarification based on what you
> think you know. Here's an example: "That las
Dan Meltzer wrote:
>> >
>> Man first you devs think it's your god-given right to behave nastily to
>> any usr, then you get all sensitive about Jakub on bugzilla. That is
>> lame, imo. Maybe there should be something about requiring a thick skin
>> to be a dev, since you so clearly require it of us
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Steve Long wrote:
>> But seriously.. why don't you guys switch off reply-to munging, already?!
>> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_120444.xml
>
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~wolf31o2/xml/reply-to.xml for those of you that
> care.
>
Thank you.
"Some of the most popula
net-firewall/ipsec-tools is without an active maintainer and has an open
security bugs #173219 (latexer seems to be MIA).
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=173219
Anyone willing to take care of this package in the future, please update
metadata.xml and CC yourself on the bugs.
--
Sune K
62 matches
Mail list logo
