On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 06:36:37PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Apr 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> While I agree with much of what you say about the need for policy to be
> clear, I will continue to urge caution when being dictatorial about
> policy.
>
> I only disagree with Manoj's
On Thu, 30 Apr 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 04:06:44AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Hi,
> > >>"Philip" == Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > I may have over reacted to being the lone voice crying in the
> > wilderness bit.
>
> I prefer to keep
On debian-devel, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> FWIW, 2 and 4 conflict. I think it's in policy now (or soon will be) that a
> package cannot modify any conffile, even if the conffile in in the package.
Oh, dear. This means that the clever bit of code I've put into svgalib will
suddenly b
On Thu, Apr 30, 1998 at 04:06:44AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Philip" == Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> I may have over reacted to being the lone voice crying in the
> wilderness bit.
I prefer to keep away from such discussions until the air cleaned up a bit,
b
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, it was gfetting frustating, what with being in the middle of
> two conversations, one with Dale and James, who are of the opinion
> that policy is a guideline, and not a set of rules adopted by the
> project
Again, please don't misrepresent my
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK. I give. And, on the principle that if you can't beat 'em, join
> 'em, I now agree with Jame Troup and Dale Scheetz and formally
> declare that Policy does not govern may packages from this point on,
> and shall close any policy related Bugs ASAP.
Hi,
>>"Philip" == Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Philip> Manoj, Was my previous mail really that annoying ? If so, I
Philip> apologise profusely (I was fairly tired at the time I wrote
Philip> it, so may have started to be rather more argumentative that I
Philip> meant to be)
W
Manoj,
Was my previous mail really that annoying ? If so, I apologise profusely (I
was fairly tired at the time I wrote it, so may have started to be rather more
argumentative that I meant to be)
I think we actually hold fairly similar opinions about this subject. Did you
ever see my previou
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Again, this happens not to be the case. I was perfectly happy
> letting policy be policy until a well respected senior Debian
> developer made statements to the effect "Go right ahead and
> violate policy. Thats what I do"
>
> And anoth
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK. I give. And, on the principle that if you can't beat 'em,
> join 'em, I now agree with Jame Troup and Dale Scheetz and formally
> declare that Policy does not govern may packages from this point on,
> and shall close any policy related Bugs
Hi,
>>"Philip" == Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Philip> 2) this is going way off topic, and has been quite tedious for
Philip> some time.
OK. I give. And, on the principle that if you can't beat 'em,
join 'em, I now agree with Jame Troup and Dale Scheetz and formally
declare
On 29 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Dale> The Policy Statement is a set of rules for the behavior of
> Dale> developers, set down by the "ruling body", sometimes referred to
> Dale> as "the government". When those rules are view
12 matches
Mail list logo
