From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EWloa-00012u-0W for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 01 Nov 2005 02:23:56 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jA12Mmiq018446; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 02:22:48 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jA12KBdC008957 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 02:20:12 GMT Received: from cpe-65-26-255-237.wi.res.rr.com ([65.26.255.237] helo=nightcrawler) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EWlkx-0002kP-Jb for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 01 Nov 2005 02:20:11 +0000 Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 20:19:46 -0600 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP ??: Critical News Reporting Message-ID: <20051101021946.GE10657@nightcrawler> References: <20051101015125.1cc45eb4@snowdrop.home> <46059ce10510311808v3d2c041blaa1bb3dbc4afeaf9@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="10jrOL3x2xqLmOsH" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46059ce10510311808v3d2c041blaa1bb3dbc4afeaf9@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Archives-Salt: f4b761f7-17c8-4f3b-bd6d-5a773a23efcf X-Archives-Hash: 88e9e50ef29219e8c914a92d11164129 --10jrOL3x2xqLmOsH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 09:08:19PM -0500, Dan Meltzer wrote: > I spoke to you about this in PM, but I think I didn't make it clear, > so here we are :) >=20 > WRT links in file updates, this seems completely backwards. If a user > was admining over ssh, it would be far easier for them to load www.g.o > in their browser vs. copying link from terminal to their browser, but > for that matter, why is ssh relevent wrt links in files, but not when > we are talking about it being lightweight? If a user is not expected > to have a browser to recieve the news, how can they be expected to > have one to view doc's about it. Links would be to guides, and bugs. Like it or not, that requires a browser... distributing notice of this=20 information however does not require a browser. > Seems like these doc's should just be added to the news, none of them > are _that_ long. Guides/docs live on the site; distributing a snapshot of them in a=20 news posting is a bad idea... forcing an emerge --sync to get at a doc=20 is just plain daft. ~harring --10jrOL3x2xqLmOsH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDZtDCvdBxRoA3VU0RArZhAKClprIPImQ01I0S6uf6o0AbPd4VlwCeILZw 3elyQSpt79Umrqrkrs+MiFk= =KHW7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --10jrOL3x2xqLmOsH-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list