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 1EYLyP-0000Vi-B7 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2005 11:12:37 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jA5BBtcE010907; Sat, 5 Nov 2005 11:11:55 GMT Received: from smtp040.tiscali.dk (smtp040.tiscali.dk [212.54.64.106]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jA5BACN8009174 for ; Sat, 5 Nov 2005 11:10:12 GMT Received: from kloeri (62.79.108.22.adsl.ynoe.tiscali.dk [62.79.108.22]) by smtp040.tiscali.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id jA5BBndq023013 for ; Sat, 5 Nov 2005 12:11:51 +0100 (MET) Received: by kloeri (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 5 Nov 2005 12:10:06 +0100 From: kloeri@gentoo.org Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 12:10:06 +0100 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 "Critical News Reporting" Round Two Message-ID: <20051105111006.GA14844@kloeri> References: <20051105005814.0de0d8ff@snowdrop.home> <436C8951.4010008@gentoo.org> 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: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <436C8951.4010008@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id jA5BBtdo010907 X-Archives-Salt: 1480aea4-4e75-400c-b0db-6960024f0468 X-Archives-Hash: 365d738ed8ef8da0e80dcdd1dd8b8979 On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 11:28:33AM +0100, Grobian wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > >Motivation > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > >There are currently several ways of getting news out to our users, non= e of=20 > >them > >particularly effective: >=20 > This assumes the following ways are really ineffective, something which= =20 > you don't prove or give any reason for. Hence it's eligable for anothe= r=20 > big discussion. To avoid that, I would suggest to add a number of=20 > reasons, or whatever to make this assumption sound (more) valid. It is= =20 > important, I think, that the reader can understand your grounds for=20 > saying this. > (I personally disagree on this statement now, but it makes no use=20 > discussing it since you haven't given any ground as on why. Maybe if=20 > you would give a definition, I could adjust my own definition and agree= .) >=20 You must not have read the [#forums-whining]_ reference as that makes it quite clear that existing methods isn't adequate. Even if you think the apache maintainers made lots of mistakes you can't really fault us for not trying to get the news of config changes out to all users. Regards, Bryan =C3=98stergaard --=20 gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list