On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 12:30:55 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > What the heck is the OSS-QM?
>
> Already posted it to the list several weeks ago:
>
> http://www.metux.de/download/oss-qm-project-2010050101.pdf
Which list? You've been cross-posting to multiple lists, was that
announcement cross-posted to the same lists?
Yet another reason why cross-posting to mailing lists is bad.
--
Neil Bothwick
- How many surrealists does it take to change a light bulb?
- Two: one to hold the giraffe, the other to fill the bathtub with
lots of brightly colored machine tools.
07-08-2010, 12:25 PM
Alan McKinnon
On Thursday 08 July 2010 00:56:52 Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>
> YFYI: yet another of my ebuilds kicked-down.
>
> It's an improved version of procmail, which automatically creates
> missing maildir directories.
Are you running some kind of propaganda campaign here where you whinge about
devs kicking your stuff? If so, I doubt too many people care.
Just start and register your own overly. If it's any good, you'll get
traction.
>
>
> cu
>
> ----- Forwarded message from bugzilla-daemon@gentoo.org -----
>
> From: bugzilla-daemon@gentoo.org
> Subject: [Bug 322157] [mail-filter/procmail] new ebuild + autocreate
> maildirs To: weigelt@metux.de
> Reply-To: DO NOT REPLY <devnull@localhost.invalid>
> Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 20:06:53 +0000 (UTC)
>
> DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL. Also, do not reply via email to the person
> whose email is mentioned below. To comment on this bug, please visit:
>
> Clear-Text: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=322157
> Secure: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=322157
>
>
> ssuominen@gentoo.org changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> - Status|NEW |RESOLVED
> Resolution| |WONTFIX
>
>
>
>
> ------- Comment #2 from ssuominen@gentoo.org 2010-07-07 20:06 0000 -------
> The SRC_URI is pointing to something unofficial, so this is a WONTFIX.
--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
07-08-2010, 02:08 PM
Dale
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 12:30:55 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Which list? You've been cross-posting to multiple lists, was that
announcement cross-posted to the same lists?
Yet another reason why cross-posting to mailing lists is bad.
I agree. Enrico, since you are working with ebuilds and trying to add
to the tree, you need to post on -dev. This list is for users trying to
get help with getting packages to install, work and how to work with the
programs they install. This list does other things to but that is the
basics of it. Since you are developing packages, or trying to, you need
to be on -dev.
You might want to find a well respected developer and discuss the way
Gentoo does things off of any list. You are only going to make things
worse for yourself. At some point, you are going to be ignored by
default. Sort of hard to prove yourself when no one is listening.
Dale
:-) :-)
07-10-2010, 05:05 AM
Enrico Weigelt
* Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree. Enrico, since you are working with ebuilds and trying to add
> to the tree, you need to post on -dev. This list is for users trying to
> get help with getting packages to install, work and how to work with the
> programs they install. This list does other things to but that is the
> basics of it. Since you are developing packages, or trying to, you need
> to be on -dev.
My idea is that some folks here (which are not @ -dev) might be
interested, too.
> You might want to find a well respected developer and discuss the way
> Gentoo does things off of any list.
If you're talking about things like continuing with epatches instead
of git repos ... well, there's not much to say here. I'll continue
doing it my way and offer my ebuilds to the world - everbody's free
to try it or simply ignore it.
cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
07-10-2010, 04:07 PM
Enrico Weigelt
* Robin H. Johnson <robbat2@gentoo.org> schrieb:
Hi,
> > It's an improved version of procmail, which automatically creates
> > missing maildir directories.
> Stock procmail does this already.
>
> From procmailrc:
> If the mailbox is specified to be an MH folder or maildir folder,
> procmail will create the necessary directories if they don't exist,
> rather than treat the mail??? box as a non-existent filename.
Only applies to maildir mailboxes, not mbox. The problem is: if
you have mbox'es in subdirs which dont exist yet, procmail fails.
cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/
* Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> schrieb:
> On 07/08/2010 01:56 AM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> >
> > YFYI: yet another of my ebuilds kicked-down.
> >
> > It's an improved version of procmail, which automatically creates
> > missing maildir directories.
>
> Provide your patches as plain/text attachments like everyone else does,
I've already explained the strategy behind the git repo (and not
doing plaintext patches). Please refer to my paper, and my other
mails posted recently on this list.
cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 12:13, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
> I've already explained the strategy behind the git repo (and not
> doing plaintext patches). Please refer to my paper, and my other
> mails posted recently on this list.
I'm not quite sure I understand your response here. He didn't ask for
you to explain the strategy. He asked for you to provide plain-text
patches.
I think a point has been made pretty clear at this point: they need
plain-text patches. Requiring developers to learn an entirely new
work-flow just to get your patches into the tree is time-consuming and
bothersome, at the least. This isn't a discussion about whether or not
your system is better. It's about how best to integrate your work into
Gentoo.
The developers have decided the best way is through plain-text
patches. That's really all there is to it. Take it or leave it.
The discussion about how best to join multiple branches of development
across the open-source world together really does not belong in this
thread, as far as I can tell.
--
Â* Â* Jacob
Â* Â* "For then there will be great distress, unequaled
Â* Â* from the beginning of the world until now — and never
Â* Â* to be equaled again. If those days had not been cut
Â* Â* short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the
Â* Â* elect those days will be shortened."
Â* Â* Are you ready?
07-11-2010, 07:01 AM
Hans de Graaff
On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 01:28 -0400, Jacob Godserv wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 12:13, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
> > I've already explained the strategy behind the git repo (and not
> > doing plaintext patches). Please refer to my paper, and my other
> > mails posted recently on this list.
>
> I'm not quite sure I understand your response here. He didn't ask for
> you to explain the strategy. He asked for you to provide plain-text
> patches.
I do understand the response, because part of the strategy mentioned
*is* not to provide plain-text patches, but instead manage them,
possibly jointly with other distributions, in a midstream repository.
From the comments it looks like most developers (including me) won't be
happy to switch to such an intermediate point at the moment. Perhaps the
best approach would be to focus on packages with unmaintained or
abandoned upstreams. For those packages there is a much more clear
benefit of pooling together distribution patches.
