Ean Schuessler wrote:
In any case, I have decided to continue with my maintainership and have an
alarming appetite for flamemail when I've put my mind to something. In the
interest of saving everyone keystrokes I move that we get used to the fact
that I am still the maintainer and talk about mov
Hi Grzegorz,
Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
W liście z wto, 02-03-2004, godz. 10:54, Stefan Gybas pisze:
[... cutting out all things that I agree with ... ]
- License conflicts with GPL'ed Java interpreters
Currently Kaffe 1.1.x is the best choice for running Java applications
in Debian. It i
Hi all,
Stefan Gybas wrote:
Arnaud and Dalibor gave a talk about packaging Java software which
covered JPackage (http://www.jpackage.org/), Gentoo, FreeBSD and of
course Debian. One goal of this talk was to improve collaboration
between these projects and Red Hat's effort to package Java softw
Adam Majer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
>> Take an account on Alioth (it'll be the same as your Debian login), drop
>> me a mail when you have your account and I'll add you to pkg-java
>> project. After that, we can setup a separate mailing list, then upload
>> kaffe with yo
Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
>
>> Take an account on Alioth (it'll be the same as your Debian login), drop
>> me a mail when you have your account and I'll add you to pkg-java
>> project.
>
> I have already done this on 15-Jan-2004 and sent Ean a mail about
> it
Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
Take an account on Alioth (it'll be the same as your Debian login), drop
me a mail when you have your account and I'll add you to pkg-java
project.
I have already done this on 15-Jan-2004 and sent Ean a mail about it.
However, I did not get a response.
I propose kaffe to be
Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
Take an account on Alioth (it'll be the same as your Debian login), drop
me a mail when you have your account and I'll add you to pkg-java
project. After that, we can setup a separate mailing list, then upload
kaffe with you and me as Uploaders and the list as the official
mai
Ean Schuessler wrote:
In any case, I have decided to continue with my maintainership and have an
alarming appetite for flamemail when I've put my mind to something. In the
interest of saving everyone keystrokes I move that we get used to the fact
that I am still the maintainer and talk about mov
elijah wright wrote:
You simply making Arnaud the official maintainer sounds like a good idea.
Several people have mentioned that it is "a nice thing" to leave you as
the maintainer because this is your "last debian package", but i submit
that that *has* to cease to be an issue if you're not going
Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Arnaud,
>
> You know perfectly well that you are distorting the facts.
?!
> Presumably, you think that you can escalate this situation to the
> point that QA will take Kaffe away from me and make you the
> maintainer. If that is your strategy, then
Hi Dalibor,
I've suspended my discussion of the topic on -devel for the convenience of
other Debianers (many of whom think Java is fat, slow, proprietary and
silly).
I regret that I wasn't at FOSDEM with you, but I was inconveniently in America
at the time. I'll also agree that we haven't had
Hi Mark,
I don't think I've made any attempt to paint my past maintainership as
exemplary or even good for that matter. To have any reasonable discussion,
however, we need to talk about events since I made my request for help with
the Kaffe package.
I know Arnaud has done a lot of good work an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
>
>> Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove
>> > Kaffe from seven architectures with
Ean, dude, you've been treating Arnaud terribly on here. How about you
get over it, work on your package a bit, and simply cheer up?
All I've seen, as an outsider to this, is a vast amount of defensive
posturing from you. I've observed Arnaud trying to be nice to you - why
are you still trying
On Thursday 04 March 2004 14:43, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> When I returned to Dallas on the 25th I spent a day or so catching up with
> work and then prepared a Kaffe 1.1.4 package. When I went to upload this
> package I found, once again, that you had already performed an NMU. You
> knew I was inten
Arnaud,
You know perfectly well that you are distorting the facts. Presumably, you
think that you can escalate this situation to the point that QA will take
Kaffe away from me and make you the maintainer. If that is your strategy,
then fine, but I'll tell you now that it is a stupid and counter
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove
> > Kaffe from seven architectures without consulting me. You made that
> > request to -devel and that request required this respons
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 11:52:06PM +0100, Stefan Gybas wrote:
Subject: Re: Ean, please orphan Kaffe!, was Re: Co-maintaining Kaffe
Please do this.
It is clear that you are not working together productively. Arnaud has
been doing an excellent job with kaffe - it seems he has more time to
spend on
Hi Ean,
Ean Schuessler wrote:
The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove Kaffe
from seven architectures without consulting me. You made that request to
-devel and that request required this response. If you feel foolish then lay
the blame closer to the source.
He con
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, it still seems best to just let the QA team sort things out.
> They should be able to advise you on what else to do if you continue
> to feel that a hijack is justified.
Thanks for your explanations,
Cheers,
--
.''`.
: :' :rnaud
`.
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 01:14:56PM +0100, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> > And 7.4 details how the QA handles orphaning packages maintained by
> > inactive maintainers.
>
> I'd like someone to point me where is the reference of the ITH?! It's
> the second time I read about ITH but I don't know where to s
Hi,
As an up-up-stream maintainer for GNU Classpath, which is used by kaffe
and as a kaffe developer I must say that I find some emails about
maintaining the kaffe package for Debian highly unfair to Arnaud. Arnaud
does all the work on kaffe and communicates with lots of other package
maintainers
Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove
> Kaffe from seven architectures without consulting me. You made that
> request to -devel and that request required this response. If you
> feel foolish then lay the blame closer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I did not find the exact procedure in devref, can you point me somewhere
>> to be the more specific about this, thanks.
>
> 5.9.5 says:
I know this section, I r
Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I did not find the exact procedure in devref, can you point me somewhere
> to be the more specific about this, thanks.
5.9.5 says:
"It is not OK to simply take over a package that you feel is neglected
- that would be package hijacking. You can, of cou
Bob Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stefan Gybas wrote:
>
>> Ean has already stated that Arnaud and Ben should be a co-maintainer
>> of Kaffe in
>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2004/debian-java-200401/msg00086.html. Why
>> should Arnaud not upload if Ean is not responding? Ean should I
26 matches
Mail list logo
