On Sunday 06 November 2005 13:38, Duncan wrote:
> I don't believe the apache upgrade issues were announced on the announce
> list.
For the record, it was sent to the announce list on 2004-12-24.
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [gentoo-announce] Apache packages refresh on 8th January 20
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Could we by chance, mandate some sort of comment field in that file not
unlike package.mask?
I usually like to know the reason why these flags are being switched on.
Certainly there are some flags that I don't mind and there are others
where I just ha
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 22:50:42 +0100
Jan Kundrát <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 04 of November 2005 02:50 Lance Albertson wrote:
> > After reading through the heated thread, I have yet to see your
> > valid point of pushing xml for such a simple task. All I have seen
> > is two 3rd grade kids
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 09:33:50 +0100 Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > | Which means you won't be able to satisfy your "preemptive"
| > | requirement.
| >
| > Not at all. You can warn users repeatedly, but there comes a point
| > when trying to warn them any further bec
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 14:38:47 -0700 Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| While I agree with the point you make, I don't believe the apache
| upgrade issues were announced on the announce list. The news in the
| tree thing is a good idea, IMO, but it'll take some time to
| implement. "Earth changing
Stuart Herbert posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
excerpted below, on Sun, 06 Nov 2005 20:37:14 +:
> On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 13:58 +0100, Grobian wrote:
>> A lot Gentoo users I know read gentoo-announce and the GWN.
>
> But *many* more don't. That's what we learned from the Apache package
> refresh,
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 13:58 +0100, Grobian wrote:
> A lot Gentoo users I know read gentoo-announce and the GWN.
But *many* more don't. That's what we learned from the Apache package
refresh, and what we've also learned from the PHP5 work.
> Works fine for me.
What works for you is irrelevant t
Nathan L. Adams wrote:
Just keep in mind that portage is supposed to be non-interactive and
most users like it that way. (Although the countdown when cleaning out
old packages kinda breaks that idea, but I digress.)
This must be some definition of the word interactive i'm not aware of.
;) Dis
Jason Stubbs wrote:
I seem to be repeating myself... What's an example of repository-specific
non-package-specific news? Why does `emerge --changelog` not suffice for
package-specific news?
a) maintainers don't put important news in their changelogs.
there are a few exceptions. gregkh's ude
Stuart Herbert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just released webapp-config v1.11 into the Portage tree. It
Stuart, have you had a chance to look at Bugzilla Bug 101234 regarding
webapp-config-1.11-r1 recently?
It was opened on 2005-08-03 and there seems to have been no progress on
resolving it since it w
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Which means you won't be able to satisfy your "preemptive"
| requirement.
Not at all. You can warn users repeatedly, but there comes a point when
trying to warn them any further becomes futile.
Then what is the point of this GLEP? Instead, just warn people through
ex
11 matches
Mail list logo
