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 1EdX8o-0003U1-Ju for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:08:47 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAJI7VeN027524; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:07:31 GMT Received: from server8324611272.serverpool.info (unimatrix-01.org [83.246.112.72]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAJI5d4h001360 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:05:39 GMT Received: (qmail 16989 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2005 18:05:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pluto.atHome) (kabel@cat0.de@cat0.de@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Nov 2005 18:05:37 -0000 Received: by pluto.atHome (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:05:38 +0100 Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:05:38 +0100 From: Matti Bickel To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain Message-ID: <20051119180538.GA10526@pluto.atHome> References: <1132333748.8524.9.camel@localhost> <200511182022.00662.cshields@gentoo.org> <437EAABE.5050502@gentoo.org> <200511182042.30961.cshields@gentoo.org> <20051119152050.GH12958@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <437F56ED.9020904@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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <437F56ED.9020904@gentoo.org> User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel (Linux) X-Archives-Salt: 32fd3f14-89ae-4f8a-a9fe-56f9cf86d8a9 X-Archives-Hash: 35d039d9266b7c34e22ee35e0eec9e96 --TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thierry Carrez wrote: > Grant Goodyear wrote: > > Corey Shields wrote: [Fri Nov 18 2005, 10:42:30PM CST] > >=20 > >>Still screwed up. Lesson learned, make friends with a majority of the= =20 > >>council, write and propose a glep the day before a meeting and then pus= h it=20 > >>through. wow. sounds a lot like American politics. > >=20 > > That's quite an indictment. You've skipped right past the notion that > > perhaps a mistake was made to accuse the Council of cronyism.=20 Everybody reading the council-transcripts would eventually agree that the GLEP was properly discussed. The rejection of the GLEP first time was part of the conspiracy too, i spose? Come on. I do agree that timing and communication was bad. However i happened to ping hparker just a few days before the vote came up and he pointed me to the svn changelog stating that the revised GLEP was waiting there happily. So in fact it was *not* a failure of a revised GLEP but a post to -dev. > [...] > So we took the median way, accept that GLEP with those changes nobody > complained about, and create policy so that such things won't happen > in the future. Apparently we were wrong on two accounts : Taking the median way angers both extremes. But i regard the councils decision as the least of 3 evils. > - There were people that don't have an opinion on the subject but were > watching the council for its first bad step to be able to accuse it of > abuse of power or worse Seeing this actually happen has driven me nuts. Hey, where's the spirit? When i came in, i learned about finding the best technical solution to a given problem. However with this hick-hack my respect for a few developers has experienced a sharp decline. > I won't stand (mostly) alone defending the Council handling of the > problem, we were just trying to find the most acceptable solution, which > is what we were elected for. Let the vocal minority reverse that > decision, I no longer care. :( Wake up! We are having a 90+ thread about a email subdomain issue turning into council bashing. What the heck?! This is a plea for sanity. Please stick to the facts and lets find the best solution for this IMO awfully little problem. So more to the facts. As a AT, the main point in having a @g.o adress is, that you're easily recognized. Email from and to devs and fellow AT/HTs is spotted faster and priorized accordingly. (The same applys to IRC, IMHO) Infra has made it clear that anything other then =3D=3DNULL will be a pain in the ass. I agree with that point. Given that two arguments, i'll go with the @g.o adress. But please, if there's a majority of devs disagreeing: every AT, who's spoken up here said that they don't care about the adress. So do i. Email is just a tiny bit of the GLEP and IMHO the least important. However the main idea was the tree access and i'm really looking forward to see that implemented. Regards, Matti --TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDf2lyfNMcoUhJ7GwRAoWWAJ41DoS9nP1vGw7bhHMU5IRV8UawxgCfRcfb 5fuv9Bv+/M8SQsdXjqF1tX4= =fioa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list