Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 14:37 -0400, Alec Warner wrote: > > > > You cannot allow things to get out of hand like they do. Everyone here > > obviously wants to make gentoo better. However, NOT everyone has the right > > to do so. > > Not everyone has the right? I think the GPL would preclude that >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Alec Warner
You cannot allow things to get out of hand like they do. Everyone here obviously wants to make gentoo better. However, NOT everyone has the right to do so. Not everyone has the right? I think the GPL would preclude that statement. Not everyone has the *drive*, or the social skills, or the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Andrew Gaffney
Peter wrote: On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:13:23 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: I just want to prefix this by saying that I was simply going to ignore your posts in this thread completely due to your obviously inflammatory nature at the beginning. Now that you're posting actual constructive criticism

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Chris Gianelloni
I just want to prefix this by saying that I was simply going to ignore your posts in this thread completely due to your obviously inflammatory nature at the beginning. Now that you're posting actual constructive criticisms, I'd like to respond. By the way, thank you for changing your tone to some

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Josh Saddler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Seemant Kulleen wrote: > (well, it's run more like a commune, but anyway). I *knew* someone else was using my soap!!! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFE+t8rsJQqN81j74RAuYUAJ4qa9GuyISG5PdVHq3Nuo58lBmmFgCgk4z/ v9O

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Seemant Kulleen
Peter, Your two cents are worth a lot. Pretty much all of what you've said has been echoed time and again on this list and on the -core list (and probably an irc channel or two). The concept of "business" aside, the points you make about having a leadership in place are on target, in my opinion.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Grant Goodyear
Peter wrote: [Fri Sep 22 2006, 07:29:57AM CDT] > We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are > customers. No users, no distro. Actually, I still think that agriffis was correct in his assertion that most devs work on Gentoo for their own interests, and that the developers

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Seemant Kulleen
On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 12:29 +, Peter wrote: > We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are > customers. No users, no distro. That is not strictly true. You can have a distro without users -- nobody but you would be using it -- it's still a distro. It all depends on

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Simon Stelling
Peter wrote: > We can disagree on that point. All distros are businesses. Users are > customers. No users, no distro. I haven't received a single paycheck in two years. What a shitty business. -- Kind Regards, Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Jochen Maes
Peter wrote: > On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:15:14 +0200, Jochen Maes wrote: > > snip... > > >>> glad you were an exception. >>> >>> >>> >> glad i never knew you when i was a gentoo dev... I know one thing, you >> won't ever get a hump out of me! >> > > You're arguing a different point.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Delay in approval of new developers

2006-09-22 Thread Jochen Maes
Peter wrote: > On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:25:26 +1000, Andrew Ross wrote: > > snip... > >>> That's a laugh! Problem is that no devs seem to get approved in a timely >>> fashion. >>> >> As a recently recruited developer, I'd just like to say that I was very >> happy with the approval time of m