Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Mon Oct 10 2005, 05:40:37PM CDT]
> I see the number of objections raised regarding GLEP 40 as a sign that
> it needs rewriting, not a sign that it should be pushed to voting...
> Perhaps making everyone happy is impossible, but equally there
> shouldn't be huge amounts of un
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:22:07 -0500 Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Mon Oct 10 2005, 04:43:19PM CDT]
| > Isn't the idea that someone writes out a draft GLEP and gets it
| > discussed on -dev (and repeats said process until everyone is happy
| > with the GLEP) *bef
Grant Goodyear wrote: [Mon Oct 10 2005, 05:22:07PM CDT]
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Mon Oct 10 2005, 04:43:19PM CDT]
> > Isn't the idea that someone writes out a draft GLEP and gets it
> > discussed on -dev (and repeats said process until everyone is happy
> > with the GLEP) *before* pushing things t
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Mon Oct 10 2005, 04:43:19PM CDT]
> Isn't the idea that someone writes out a draft GLEP and gets it
> discussed on -dev (and repeats said process until everyone is happy
> with the GLEP) *before* pushing things to the council?
I disagree, but only very slightly. I never exp
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 23:36:36 +0200 Marcin Kryczek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| someone (sorry - but i can't remind who exactly and i can't find that
| mail) mentiond it'd be nice to have some ~weekly summary of important
| (for developers) decisions made in community.
| i think it's good idea, b
hi,
currently i'm the only active developer in net-p2p herd, which is really
uncomfortable for me (not mentioning about situation if i'll be away for
few weeks). i need at least 2 developers (preferably with java knowledge,
becouse i do not know java at all, but it's not obligate) for help with
te
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 02:33:45PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Reminder:
>
> Next council meeting is scheduled for this Thursday. Deadline to submit
> discussion items and/or GLEPs is set to Tuesday, October 11th, 1900 UTC.
>
someone (sorry - but i can't remind who exactly and i can't find tha
Chris Gianelloni wrote: [Mon Oct 10 2005, 08:00:57AM CDT]
> I'd like to see the council fight it out over^W^W^W^Wdiscuss which
> logger should be the default.
Gads, what a horrible idea (in my opinion, anyway). Surely we can come
to some sort of decision on this issue without involving the council
hi,
currently i'm the only active developer in net-p2p herd, which is really
uncomfortable for me (not mentioning about situation if i'll be away for
few weeks). i need at least 2 developers (preferably with java knowledge,
becouse i do not know java at all, but it's not obligate) for help with
te
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 11:36:45AM -0600, Tres Melton wrote:
> I think that the best thing to do would be to put up a web page with
> some documentation or a topic outline and then schedule a Q&A on IRC and
> maybe in the forums too. There are a lot of topics that aren't
> documented that well. W
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:23:29 -0600
R Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> what other than equery would need to be fixed to recognize
> the overlay? is there anything that would explicitly break if a
> USE flag was in both use.desc and use.local.desc?
>
Last time this feature was discussed here, i
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Here's my question... use.local.desc is already package-specific, so why
would we need yet *another* place to put package-specific definitions?
Would it not be enough to have use.local.desc overlay on use.desc? If
package foo uses global USE flag bar in a way different f
Bruno internet.lu> writes:
>
> On Monday 10 October 2005 14:53, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> >
> > Here's my question... use.local.desc is already package-specific, so why
> > would we need yet *another* place to put package-specific definitions?
> > Would it not be enough to have use.local.desc ov
On Monday 10 October 2005 14:53, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>
> Here's my question... use.local.desc is already package-specific, so why
> would we need yet *another* place to put package-specific definitions?
> Would it not be enough to have use.local.desc overlay on use.desc? If
> package foo uses
On Mon, 2005-10-10 at 14:33 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Reminder:
>
> Next council meeting is scheduled for this Thursday. Deadline to submit
> discussion items and/or GLEPs is set to Tuesday, October 11th, 1900 UTC.
I'd like to see the council fight it out over^W^W^W^Wdiscuss which
logger sho
On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 15:13 -0600, R Hill wrote:
> Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > On Sat, 2005-10-01 at 21:22 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >> We've discussed adding this to metadata.xml a few times in the past,
> >> but every time there was opposition from a vocal minority of one who
> >> claimed t
On Sat, 2005-10-08 at 00:30 +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 of September 2005 10:31 Jan Kundrát wrote:
> > What should be changed, Handbook or profiles?
>
> Any progress on this subject?
No. It doesn't look like any decision was made.
--
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strateg
Reminder:
Next council meeting is scheduled for this Thursday. Deadline to submit
discussion items and/or GLEPs is set to Tuesday, October 11th, 1900 UTC.
--
Thierry Carrez (Koon)
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
18 matches
Mail list logo
