# Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (27 Aug 2006)
+# Masking net-misc/dhcpv6 for treecleaners and bug(s) # 143189
+# Sept 27th for removal
+net-misc/dhcpv6
+
+# Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (27 Aug 2006)
+# Masking app-mobilephone/gtkesms for treecleaners and bug(s) # 142991
+# Sept 27th for remo
On Thursday 24 August 2006 16:58, Lance Albertson wrote:
> True, that might work, but then you run the risk of losing cohesion of
> what everyone knows. To me, the same person(s) should be at all those
> meetings if possible. Its better to have one or two people who know
> whats going on with all c
On Friday 25 August 2006 21:41, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> Personally, I'm opposed to a return that that hierarchy. The idea
> that somehow desktop, server, and other such projects should sit at an
> exclusive top-table doesn't work for me.
While I am partly responsible for setting it up I have to a
On Thursday 24 August 2006 10:26, Wernfried Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 12:54:23AM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > The council doesn't actually do anything AFAICT, it just "approves" GLEP
> > decisions that have already been made. So in effect we have no
> > leadership.
>
> Suspending s
Alec Warner wrote:
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Thursday 24 August 2006 20:46, Alec Warner wrote:
Robert Cernansky wrote:
What bothers me also, is that it has not plugin design like
xmms. Support for plugins is very good because lot of people can write
plugins for lot of things. This is why people
# Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (27 Aug 2006)
# Masking dev-libs/libhoard for treecleaners and bug(s) # 99473
# Sept 27th for removal
dev-libs/libhoard
# Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (27 Aug 2006)
# Masking app-misc/emelfm2 for treecleaners and bug(s) # 90476
# Sept 27th for removal
app-misc/
On Sat, 2006-08-26 at 10:46 -0700, Josh Saddler wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > Who cares. It works (mostly), it is lightweight, and there are enough
> > people
> > using it to keep it in the tree. As long as things don't break beyond
> > r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> Who cares. It works (mostly), it is lightweight, and there are enough people
> using it to keep it in the tree. As long as things don't break beyond repair
> I see no reason whatsoever to remove xmms (or any other largely unma
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Thursday 24 August 2006 20:46, Alec Warner wrote:
>> Robert Cernansky wrote:
>>> What bothers me also, is that it has not plugin design like
>>> xmms. Support for plugins is very good because lot of people can write
>>> plugins for lot of things. This is why people do not
On Thursday 24 August 2006 02:17, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>
> If I could go back in time a couple of years and prevent this democracy
> from ever happening, I would. If I could fix these problems myself, I
> would. But it requires buy-in from the entire Gentoo community if we're
> to do anything abo
On Thursday 24 August 2006 20:46, Alec Warner wrote:
> Robert Cernansky wrote:
> > What bothers me also, is that it has not plugin design like
> > xmms. Support for plugins is very good because lot of people can write
> > plugins for lot of things. This is why people do not want to switch
> > from
Duncan wrote:
Wernfried Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 26 Aug
2006 12:17:03 +0200:
Quit assuming I mean anything, you're batting zero for two right now.
What's the problem? I wasn't sure how you meant it, so i assumed you
meant it that way. As for
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 05:53:02 +0200 Wernfried Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Ok, so i guess it boils down to:
| You and Chris believe devrel won't do anything based on your personal
| judgement.
| I believe devrel will do something based on my personal judgement.
Not so much personal judgement a
Wernfried Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 26 Aug
2006 12:17:03 +0200:
>> Quit assuming I mean anything, you're batting zero for two right now.
>
> What's the problem? I wasn't sure how you meant it, so i assumed you
> meant it that way. As for batting
On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 02:35:53PM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > Btw, the new policy also includes the possibility of refering a
> > decision to the council in certain cases, see "Resolution and Appeal".
>
> I've read the policy.
Did i say you didn't?
> > > I'm sure nearly every member
> >
15 matches
Mail list logo
