Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anthony Towns writes:
>
> > This is not the case; in most cases the people complaining about
> > ifupdown have made it very clear they're not interested in
> > co-maintenance.
>
> I know one person who is interested in co-maintenance. It doesn'
Anthony Towns writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Anthony Towns writes:
> >>This is not the case; in most cases the people complaining about
> >>ifupdown have made it very clear they're not interested in
> >>co-maintenance.
> > I know one person who is interested in co-maintenance.
>
> Wel
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Anthony Towns writes:
This is not the case; in most cases the people complaining about
ifupdown have made it very clear they're not interested in
co-maintenance.
I know one person who is interested in co-maintenance.
Well, from your other mail it looks like you're more i
Anthony Towns writes:
> This is not the case; in most cases the people complaining about
> ifupdown have made it very clear they're not interested in
> co-maintenance.
I know one person who is interested in co-maintenance. It doesn't
really matter what "in most cases" means, what matters is whe
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Anthony is the "maintainer" of this package, and has refused either to
allow adoption or a co-maintainer arrangement with interested partes.
This is not the case; in most cases the people complaining about
ifupdown have made it very clear they're not interested in co-mai
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 03:26:23PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> My question is: when there is a technical issue, but one developer
> refuses to discuss it with tech-ctte or anyone else, can tech-ctte get
> involved?
Yes.
> It does, but I recall in the past being told that tech-ctte doesn
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Beyond that... since you've not actually stated any technical issues,
> and since the maintainer of that package is one of the DPL candidates, I
> think you should make an effort to be clear about what you're saying here.
This is a different question, and
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As described, this is an administrative issue, rather than a technical
> issue.
Yes, that's correct. At present there is no reason for tech-ctte to
be involved. My example was poorly chosen.
> Beyond that... since you've not actually stated any technic
> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What work?
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 02:46:17PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> I have in mind, for example, the ifupdown script. The maintainer has
> not made a maintainer upload for years, and so maintenance of the
> package has been proceding by
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What work?
>
> A developer who never acts would have no work to review. The technical
> committee would thus never have any reason to override any decisions
> this developer made -- because there would be no such decisions.
I have in mind, for example,
> > How can the tech-ctte override a developer by not acting?
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 10:55:21AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> No, the question is whether a developer (by never acting) can avoid
> tech-ctte review of his work.
What work?
A developer who never acts would have no work to rev
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> To: debian-vote@lists.debian.org
> > This is why I suspect ftpmaster is a particular instance of some
> > more general problem. At the moment, is there a constititional
> > loophole that one can avoid tech-ctte overruling one (the only
> > time complaints
To: debian-vote@lists.debian.org
> This is why I suspect ftpmaster is a particular instance of some
> more general problem. At the moment, is there a constititional
> loophole that one can avoid tech-ctte overruling one (the only
> time complaints are mentioned) by never acting?
I'm having trouble
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 10:49:02AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
> MJ Ray wrote:
> >That reminds me of one thing that has annoyed me during tbm's
> >leadership (sorry tbm! You have done most things well):
> >it has been very difficult to correct the bastard form of
> >my name listed on db.d.o that wa
Anthony Towns wrote:
> I think it's far more important for people working on Debian to focus
> their attention on improving our operating system; if "Mark J Ray" is a
> correct variant of your name, no matter how bastardised, I don't think
> it's worth worrying about changing that to "MJ Ray" w
MJ Ray wrote:
That reminds me of one thing that has annoyed me during tbm's
leadership (sorry tbm! You have done most things well):
it has been very difficult to correct the bastard form of
my name listed on db.d.o that was caused by a misconfigured
mailserver years ago. The [EMAIL PROTECTED] addre
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Will DPL candidates try to address delegate communication
> in general? Deal with each case individually?
Yes, to both. I think my platform makes my opinions in this respect
fairly cleary.
> 2. How would the candidate deal with complaints? Is it part
> of t
MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mark, [...]
That reminds me of one thing that has annoyed me during tbm's
leadership (sorry tbm! You have done most things well):
it has been very difficult to correct the bastard form of
my name listed on db.d.o th
18 matches
Mail list logo
