On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 01:40:51PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Debian Policy has a more formal process than developers-reference and
> I am concerned that mixing both discussions on the same channel would cause
> confusion.
>
> debian-de...@l.d.o could be a better channel for the developers-ref
Bill Allombert wrote:
> debian-de...@l.d.o could be a better channel for the developers-reference
> discussions, though with the downside of yet more outside traffic than
> debian-policy.
Not really - d-devel is a way too messy list for a useful discussion. Not sure
if there is a better list to
On 21/09/09 at 18:44 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 09:56:37AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Following a discussion on debian-de...@l.d.o[1], the way the Developers
> > Reference[2] is maintained has been changed, with the aim to make it
> > more public and easier fo
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 09:56:37AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Following a discussion on debian-de...@l.d.o[1], the way the Developers
> Reference[2] is maintained has been changed, with the aim to make it
> more public and easier for people to contribute.
>
> Changes to developers-ref
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 09:56:37AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Following a discussion on debian-de...@l.d.o[1], the way the Developers
> Reference[2] is maintained has been changed, with the aim to make it
> more public and easier for people to contribute.
...
> Finally, we could use the he
5 matches
Mail list logo
