Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Which don't have principal headquarters of their sponsor in US (but on
> the Isle of Man, which was chosen exactly because of its lax legal and
> especially tax, true, regime). Instead of comparing with Ubuntu, how is
> our configuration more complicated than OpenSuSE, which is
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 03:25:09PM +0100, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 12/05/10 15:19, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
> --snip--
> >> (http://download1.rpmfusion.org/free/fedora/rpmfusion-free-release-stable.noarch.rpm
> >>
> >> and
> >> http://download1.rpmfusion.org/nonfree/fedora/rpmfusion-nonfree-relea
On 12/05/10 15:19, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
--snip--
>> (http://download1.rpmfusion.org/free/fedora/rpmfusion-free-release-stable.noarch.rpm
>>
>> and
>> http://download1.rpmfusion.org/nonfree/fedora/rpmfusion-nonfree-release-stable.noarch.rpm)
>>
>> and agreeing on the inserting new repository
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:18:54AM +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 10.5.2010 06:54, Ralf Corsepius napsal(a):
> > Have you ever talked to Ubuntu/openSUSE users and listened to their
> > replies when telling them you are using Fedora?
> >
> > You will hear answers along the line of too much inconveni
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> Fedora is that better, sustainable way. It's not elitist, everyone is
> welcome to participate with the understanding that part of making that
> choice can involve the giving up some conveniences in the short term
> in the commitment to the la
Dne 10.5.2010 20:11, Jeff Spaleta napsal(a):
> And if that principled approach is not the most popular.. it doesn't
> mean its worth giving up. We need to shake loose the idea that being
> the most popular matters.
PREACH IT!!! PREACH IT, BROTHER!!!
--
The American Republic will endure, until po
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 10:11 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> And if that principled approach is not the most popular.. it doesn't
> mean its worth giving up. We need to shake loose the idea that being
> the most popular matters. What I want is contributor targets to shoot
> for. I want a clear vision
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 16:19 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > Let me reverse the question: How did they gather the community input?
> > >From whom it was gathered?
> > What was the question?
> > What was the answer?
> >
> > - Gilboa
> >
> >
>
> Most likely by reading or participating in the vario
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 01:28 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 11:05 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 07:28 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > > I do not agree that that working with zero community input is the way to
> > > achieve a working compromise. (And input
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 11:05 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 07:28 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > I do not agree that that working with zero community input is the way to
> > achieve a working compromise. (And input does not equal vote)
> >
> What makes you think that no commun
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 10:36 AM, drago01 wrote:
>> Fix what is broken and not break everything else so that you can
>> pretend that it isn't.
>
> Think of that opening remark as a modern twitter-friendly version of
> "A Modest Proposal" give
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 10:36 AM, drago01 wrote:
> Fix what is broken and not break everything else so that you can
> pretend that it isn't.
Think of that opening remark as a modern twitter-friendly version of
"A Modest Proposal" given in the very same spirit of Jonathon Swift's
original.
-jef
-
Jeff Spaleta (jspal...@gmail.com) said:
> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > That's the wrong argument. We all know why we _can't_ make it just work,
> > but that doesn't excuse us.
>
> You are right. The answer is clearly to export US legal rules to the
> rest of the wo
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> That's the wrong argument. We all know why we _can't_ make it just work,
>> but that doesn't excuse us.
>
> You are right. The answer is clearly to export US legal rules to the
> rest
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> That's the wrong argument. We all know why we _can't_ make it just work,
> but that doesn't excuse us.
You are right. The answer is clearly to export US legal rules to the
rest of the world so we can have an equally unfriendly playing fiel
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 07:28 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> I do not agree that that working with zero community input is the way to
> achieve a working compromise. (And input does not equal vote)
>
What makes you think that no community input is considered?
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is
On 05/10/2010 08:20 PM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
>
> On ۱۰/۰۵/۱۰ 06:38, Frank Murphy wrote:
>
>> On 10/05/10 15:05, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
>> --snipp--
>>
>> http://omega.dgplug.org/
>>
>>
> Thanks, I thought that the project is dead (IIRC, it was not provided
> for F11 last time I
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
>
> Adam Williamson wrote on 05/10/2010 3:18:06 PM +0450:
>
> On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 11:33 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
>
>
> Dne 10.5.2010 11:26, drago01 napsal(a):
>
>
> To have stuff just work.
>
>
> Go to http://senate.gov/ and ask your con
On ۱۰/۰۵/۱۰ 06:38, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 10/05/10 15:05, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
> --snipp--
>
> http://omega.dgplug.org/
>
Thanks, I thought that the project is dead (IIRC, it was not provided
for F11 last time I checked, but apparently I'm wrong). I'll contact him
to see if he is int
On 10/05/10 15:05, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
--snipp--
http://omega.dgplug.org/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
/*Adam Williamson */ wrote on 05/10/2010 3:18:06 PM
+0450:
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 11:33 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
Dne 10.5.2010 11:26, drago01 napsal(a):
To have stuff just work.
Go to http://senate.gov/ and ask your congressman to fix it. Otherwise
(for example if you don't
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 13:21 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 10.5.2010 12:48, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> > That's the wrong argument. We all know why we _can't_ make it just work,
> > but that doesn't excuse us. Sorry to take a well-worn analogy, but if
> > two guys are trying to sell you cars, and
Dne 10.5.2010 12:48, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> That's the wrong argument. We all know why we _can't_ make it just work,
> but that doesn't excuse us. Sorry to take a well-worn analogy, but if
> two guys are trying to sell you cars, and one doesn't have an engine,
> would the fact that the guy se
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 11:33 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 10.5.2010 11:26, drago01 napsal(a):
> > To have stuff just work.
>
> Go to http://senate.gov/ and ask your congressman to fix it. Otherwise
> (for example if you don't have your congressman because you are not a
> U.S. citizen), you can
Dne 10.5.2010 11:35, drago01 napsal(a):
> I didn't say that we can fix it; just that it *is* easier in other
> distributions.
Which don't have principal headquarters of their sponsor in US (but on
the Isle of Man, which was chosen exactly because of its lax legal and
especially tax, true, regime
On 05/10/2010 11:18 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 10.5.2010 06:54, Ralf Corsepius napsal(a):
>> Have you ever talked to Ubuntu/openSUSE users and listened to their
>> replies when telling them you are using Fedora?
>>
>> You will hear answers along the line of too much inconvenience to get
>> multime
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 10.5.2010 11:26, drago01 napsal(a):
>> To have stuff just work.
>
> Go to http://senate.gov/ and ask your congressman to fix it. Otherwise
> (for example if you don't have your congressman because you are not a
> U.S. citizen), you can also
Dne 10.5.2010 11:26, drago01 napsal(a):
> To have stuff just work.
Go to http://senate.gov/ and ask your congressman to fix it. Otherwise
(for example if you don't have your congressman because you are not a
U.S. citizen), you can also try to move Red Hat's headquarters outside
of U.S. (althoug
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 10.5.2010 06:54, Ralf Corsepius napsal(a):
>> Have you ever talked to Ubuntu/openSUSE users and listened to their
>> replies when telling them you are using Fedora?
>>
>> You will hear answers along the line of too much inconvenience to get
Dne 10.5.2010 06:54, Ralf Corsepius napsal(a):
> Have you ever talked to Ubuntu/openSUSE users and listened to their
> replies when telling them you are using Fedora?
>
> You will hear answers along the line of too much inconvenience to get
> multimedia working, too unstable (in the sense of low MT
On 05/09/2010 10:27 PM, Mike McGrath wrote:
> Bottom line is we should have done what we're doing now long ago, so we're
> suffering the consequences as a result. Lots of people with conflicting
> views are now here. Our lack of focus has just hurt us.
>
> Have you used OSX lately?
Have you eve
On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 15:27 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> If you think we should vote, go join debian. I think
> they do that there.
First, I never said we should 'vote'. I talked about community
involvement.
Second, if you are looking at the sure path to drive people away,
sending them to "go joi
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 10:16:45PM +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> I don't agree with that, entirely. Think about it - Red Hat sells big
> enterprise stuff. Mostly servers. Directly, PA and bleeding edge X stuff
> isn't of huge immediate interest to RH. I mean, of course RH is going to
> pay peo
On Mon, 10 May 2010, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 05/10/2010 02:10 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>
>> We do not and should never support proprietary drivers. Please NEVER
>> withhold a new version of X.Org X11 just because proprietary drivers don't
>> support it!
>>
>
> It might not be obvious but doin
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 05/10/2010 02:10 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>
>> We do not and should never support proprietary drivers. Please NEVER
>> withhold a new version of X.Org X11 just because proprietary drivers don't
>> support it!
>>
>
> It might not be obviou
On 05/10/2010 02:10 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> We do not and should never support proprietary drivers. Please NEVER
> withhold a new version of X.Org X11 just because proprietary drivers don't
> support it!
>
It might not be obvious but doing so is very counter productive even for
those user
On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 22:11 +0200, Thomas Janssen wrote:
> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > If we, as a -community- project, want to remain relevant, it is time to
> > decide who we are and what is our goal.
>
> Agreed. The who we are is easy answered, we're RHs *playgroun
[Well, sorry for posting again to this subthread, but this particular post
has nothing whatsoever to do with hall monitoring. (Time for another new
subthread?)]
Thomas Janssen wrote:
> And we're gladly acting like it, e.g. x-server not compatible with HW
> vendor drivers at release time (believe
On Sun, 9 May 2010, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 14:07 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 20:34:57 +0300,
> > Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > > Thus far, it seemed that the both the user and the developer communities
> > > were left out of these proceedings, and
On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 22:11 +0200, Thomas Janssen wrote:
> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > If we, as a -community- project, want to remain relevant, it is time to
> > decide who we are and what is our goal.
>
> Agreed. The who we are is easy answered, we're RHs *playgroun
On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 14:07 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 20:34:57 +0300,
> Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > Thus far, it seemed that the both the user and the developer communities
> > were left out of these proceedings, and everything was more-or-less
> > decided by FESCO, wh
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> If we, as a -community- project, want to remain relevant, it is time to
> decide who we are and what is our goal.
Agreed. The who we are is easy answered, we're RHs *playground*. That
is what everyone, not completely new to Linux, knows and o
On 05/10/2010 12:37 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 20:34:57 +0300,
> Gilboa Davara wrote:
>
>> Thus far, it seemed that the both the user and the developer communities
>> were left out of these proceedings, and everything was more-or-less
>> decided by FESCO, which left
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 20:34:57 +0300,
> Gilboa Davara wrote:
>> Thus far, it seemed that the both the user and the developer communities
>> were left out of these proceedings, and everything was more-or-less
>> decided by FESCO, which le
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 11:09:12 +0100,
Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> I'm tempted to agree in practice with Matej that it is. I don't think we
> can kid ourselves that we're doing a particularly good job of making a
> desktop for end users; if we were, we wouldn't be being trashed by
> Ubuntu in t
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 20:34:57 +0300,
Gilboa Davara wrote:
> Thus far, it seemed that the both the user and the developer communities
> were left out of these proceedings, and everything was more-or-less
> decided by FESCO, which left (large?) parts of the developer community
> feeling left ou
On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 11:09 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I'm tempted to agree in practice with Matej that it is. I don't think we
> can kid ourselves that we're doing a particularly good job of making a
> desktop for end users; if we were, we wouldn't be being trashed by
> Ubuntu in this area (
On 05/09/2010 06:09 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I'm tempted to agree in practice with Matej that it is. I don't think we
> can kid ourselves that we're doing a particularly good job of making a
> desktop for end users; if we were, we wouldn't be being trashed by
> Ubuntu in this area (let alone O
On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 12:16 +0100, Camilo Mesias wrote:
> Personally I think Fedora is good at what it does, and although it
> causes me some frustration that Fedora isn't better at wooing mass
> market users, I wouldn't want to make radical changes to structures
> and processes to chase some goal
Dne 9.5.2010 12:09, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> Making any change is much harder than it should be; we always end up
> in endless discussions without any outcome while others like Ubuntu
> seems to have a better decision making process; and seriously I think
> this is the one which basically block
Personally I think Fedora is good at what it does, and although it
causes me some frustration that Fedora isn't better at wooing mass
market users, I wouldn't want to make radical changes to structures
and processes to chase some goals.
There would be much easier and more painless ways to woo thes
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 19:40 -0700, John Poelstra wrote:
>> Matěj Cepl said the following on 05/07/2010 04:41 PM Pacific Time:
>> > More and more I was writing this email, more and more I tend to agree
>> > with somebody today, who wrote tha
On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 19:40 -0700, John Poelstra wrote:
> Matěj Cepl said the following on 05/07/2010 04:41 PM Pacific Time:
> > More and more I was writing this email, more and more I tend to agree
> > with somebody today, who wrote that they key problem of the Fedora
> > community is unclear visi
2010/5/8 Matěj Cepl :
> Dne 8.5.2010 03:39, Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a):
>> It is a blessing and it is a curse. Why do more developers show up at
>> conferences these days running Ubuntu or Debian systems.. many who
>> used to run Fedora or RHL? My very non-scientific survey has been that
>> it
Dne 8.5.2010 03:39, Stephen John Smoogen napsal(a):
> It is a blessing and it is a curse. Why do more developers show up at
> conferences these days running Ubuntu or Debian systems.. many who
> used to run Fedora or RHL? My very non-scientific survey has been that
> it isn't that Ubuntu is cooler,
Dne 8.5.2010 07:33, James Antill napsal(a):
> The thread was repetitive from a thread that had been shut down because
> it had degenerated way past "be excellent to each other", and seemingly
> was restarted explicitly to incite more flames, misinformation and
> hatred.
What if, somebody is not
On 05/08/2010 01:41 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 7.5.2010 16:56, Przemek Klosowski napsal(a):
> It seemed like the combination of best of being
> completely independent and maintaining your own repository (what would
> be now called PPA; I haven't heard the term then yet) and having support
> and c
On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 20:05 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
> What worries me is that it was always my understanding, and I think the
> understanding of others, that the hall monitoring policy does not grant
> hall monitors the power to shut down threads they judge to be
> repetitive. My understandi
On 05/08/2010 02:40 AM, John Poelstra wrote:
> Matěj Cepl said the following on 05/07/2010 04:41 PM Pacific Time:
>
>> More and more I was writing this email, more and more I tend to agree
>> with somebody today, who wrote that they key problem of the Fedora
>> community is unclear vision about
Matěj Cepl said the following on 05/07/2010 04:41 PM Pacific Time:
> More and more I was writing this email, more and more I tend to agree
> with somebody today, who wrote that they key problem of the Fedora
> community is unclear vision about its purpose. I agree completely. I
> believe, that in t
2010/5/8 Matěj Cepl :
> Of course, this kind of development process doesn’t produce distro
> stable enough I could put it on my company’s server (or my mom’s
> notebook), but it could be an ideal distro for developers or
> contributors of any kind
I am a developer and i want my workstation more st
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 7.5.2010 16:56, Przemek Klosowski napsal(a):
>> Here's the rub, though: Kevin argues for aggressive development and
>> empowering the package maintainers to push out changes, even if it
>> resulted in temporary regressions. Ralf, on the other
Dne 7.5.2010 16:56, Przemek Klosowski napsal(a):
> Here's the rub, though: Kevin argues for aggressive development and
> empowering the package maintainers to push out changes, even if it
> resulted in temporary regressions. Ralf, on the other hand, reminds us
> about the need for quality control,
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 07:37 +0200, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> well there are a few potential solution to this:
>
> 1) try to get rid of this policy
> 2) use different lists/forums to continue the discussion.
>
> you pick which one is worth to go ahead with. this is not a democracy,
> and it has been s
Matt McCutchen said the following on 05/07/2010 01:41 PM Pacific Time:
> On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 20:05 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> (if you go to the policy to check this, you may be surprised to notice
>> it's suddenly sprouted the following section:
>>
>> "In addition to non-excellent individua
On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 20:05 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
> (if you go to the policy to check this, you may be surprised to notice
> it's suddenly sprouted the following section:
>
> "In addition to non-excellent individual behavior, there can be
> occasions where a mailing list thread gets "out o
On 05/07/2010 03:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 17:46 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
>
>> Normally, I'd be against it killing a thread, but the thread that
>> started this discussion had already been done awhile back and this new
>> thread added *nothing* new to the discussion.
On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 17:46 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
> Normally, I'd be against it killing a thread, but the thread that
> started this discussion had already been done awhile back and this new
> thread added *nothing* new to the discussion. Frankly, it was more
> deserving to be on Slashdot mor
2010/5/7 Matěj Cepl :
> Dne 7.5.2010 01:01, Rudolf Kastl napsal(a):
>> one of the questions raised in the meeting posted by mcepl was... "why
>> dont those people leave if they are unhappy". simple... they put alot
>> sweat blood and tears into a project, and they have friends... with
>> the develo
On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 10:56 -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> On 05/07/2010 08:48 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> > Although I don't agree with many of them in a
> > lot of places, I strongly support Kevin's, Ralf's and others position
> > that the current development is very harmful to the development of
On 05/07/2010 08:48 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Although I don't agree with many of them in a
> lot of places, I strongly support Kevin's, Ralf's and others position
> that the current development is very harmful to the development of
> Fedora and I would love them to stay and defend this still nice p
2010/5/7 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" :
> Burying the underlying issue yet again under the carpet or "Hall monitoring"
> it wont resolve it neither will a shouting contest between people do. People
> will need leave all emotion behind and look neutrally at each other point of
> view and listen to each o
On 05/07/2010 08:56 AM, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
> On Fri, 7 May 2010, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>> Totally off-topic, but I think "Spiralling Downward Towards a CapsLock
>> Doomsday" would be a fantastic band name.
>>
>>
> Or possibly a Cory Doctrow book.
>
> -sv
>
>
That totall
On Fri, 7 May 2010, Jon Ciesla wrote:
>>
>>
> Totally off-topic, but I think "Spiralling Downward Towards a CapsLock
> Doomsday" would be a fantastic band name.
>
Or possibly a Cory Doctrow book.
-sv
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/l
On 05/06/2010 07:28 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
>
>> one of the questions raised in the meeting posted by mcepl was... "why
>> dont those people leave if they are unhappy". simple... they put alot
>> sweat blood and tears into a project, and th
Burying the underlying issue yet again under the carpet or "Hall
monitoring" it wont resolve it neither will a shouting contest between
people do. People will need leave all emotion behind and look neutrally
at each other point of view and listen to each other constructive
criticism to graduall
Dne 7.5.2010 01:01, Rudolf Kastl napsal(a):
> one of the questions raised in the meeting posted by mcepl was... "why
> dont those people leave if they are unhappy". simple... they put alot
> sweat blood and tears into a project, and they have friends... with
> the development crowd and with the com
On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 07:53:52PM -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Karel Zak wrote:
> > On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 05:46:21PM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 23:22 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> >> > Dne 6.5.2010 12:28, Karel Zak napsal(a):
> >> > >> Tha
2010/5/6 Orcan Ogetbil
>
> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Karel Zak wrote:
> > On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 05:46:21PM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 23:22 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> >> > Dne 6.5.2010 12:28, Karel Zak napsal(a):
> >> > >> Thank you for pointing out yet another u
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> one of the questions raised in the meeting posted by mcepl was... "why
> dont those people leave if they are unhappy". simple... they put alot
> sweat blood and tears into a project, and they have friends... with
> the development crowd and wit
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 05:46:21PM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
>> On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 23:22 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
>> > Dne 6.5.2010 12:28, Karel Zak napsal(a):
>> > >> Thank you for pointing out yet another undemocratic policy passed by
>> > >
Dne 7.5.2010 00:45, Brian Pepple napsal(a):
> Please enlighten me then on what new information was added to this
> thread that wasn't in the prior thread that warranted keeping it alive?
Could you point out in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Hall_Monitor_Policy where it says "thread
should be clo
2010/5/7 Brian Pepple :
> On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 00:26 +0200, Karel Zak wrote:
>> On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 05:46:21PM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
>> >
>> > Normally, I'd be against it killing a thread, but the thread that
>> > started this discussion had already been done awhile back and this new
>> >
On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 00:26 +0200, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 05:46:21PM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
> >
> > Normally, I'd be against it killing a thread, but the thread that
> > started this discussion had already been done awhile back and this new
> > thread added *nothing* new to
On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 05:46:21PM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 23:22 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> > Dne 6.5.2010 12:28, Karel Zak napsal(a):
> > >> Thank you for pointing out yet another undemocratic policy passed by one
> > >> of
> > >
> > > +1 The Hall Monitor Policy is can
On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 23:22 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 6.5.2010 12:28, Karel Zak napsal(a):
> >> Thank you for pointing out yet another undemocratic policy passed by one of
> >
> > +1 The Hall Monitor Policy is cancer.
>
> +1000 it feels to me like in a bad old Communism when the open debate
Dne 6.5.2010 23:22, Matěj Cepl napsal(a):
> +1000 it feels to me like in a bad old Communism when the open debate
> was allowed only when it didn't touch the leading role of the Communist
> Party. I really don't think anybody in this thread said anything so
> sacrilegious that the thread should be
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 6.5.2010 12:28, Karel Zak napsal(a):
>>> Thank you for pointing out yet another undemocratic policy passed by one of
>>
>> +1 The Hall Monitor Policy is cancer.
>
> +1000 it feels to me like in a bad old Communism when the open debate
> was
Dne 6.5.2010 12:28, Karel Zak napsal(a):
>> Thank you for pointing out yet another undemocratic policy passed by one of
>
> +1 The Hall Monitor Policy is cancer.
+1000 it feels to me like in a bad old Communism when the open debate
was allowed only when it didn't touch the leading role of the Co
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 11:10:39PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Seth Vidal wrote:
> > * Hall monitors are allowed to send 'thread closure' posts to
> > aggressive or problematic mailing list threads to curtail issues before
^^^
This is nonsense.
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 16:01 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
> > Clarification please, how does redundancy fit under the Hall Monitor Policy?
> >
> > The basis of the Hall Monitor Policy is:
> >
> > The Fedora Board has adopted a simple motto for general behavior as a
> > member
> > of the Fedora Proje
2010/5/4 Kevin Kofler :
> Seth Vidal wrote:
>> * Hall monitors are allowed to send 'thread closure' posts to
>> aggressive or problematic mailing list threads to curtail issues before
>> they become serious enough to warrant an official warning. When this is
>> done the subject line of the me
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Camilo Mesias wrote:
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
> This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
> redundancy of it.
>
> No
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Camilo Mesias wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
redundancy of it.
No further posts to this thread will be allowed.
>
> I'm disappoin
Seth Vidal wrote:
> * Hall monitors are allowed to send 'thread closure' posts to
> aggressive or problematic mailing list threads to curtail issues before
> they become serious enough to warrant an official warning. When this is
> done the subject line of the message will be prefixed with
>
>> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>>>
>>> This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
>>> redundancy of it.
>>>
>>> No further posts to this thread will be allowed.
I'm disappointed that the thread is closed when there seems to be an
issue
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>>
>> This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
>> redundancy of it.
>>
>> No further posts to this thread will be allowed.
>>
>> Thank You,
>> Seth Vidal
>> Fe
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:45:53PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
> This thread is now closed. We've received repeated complaints about the
> redundancy of it.
>
> No further posts to this thread will be allowed.
>
> Thank You,
> Seth Vidal
> Fedora Hall Monitor
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ha
98 matches
Mail list logo
