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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GhAcL-000885-MW for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 06 Nov 2006 19:58:50 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id kA6JuXcF019929; Mon, 6 Nov 2006 19:56:33 GMT Received: from outmail.freedom2surf.net (outmail1.freedom2surf.net [194.106.33.237]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kA6JsFiK008421 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 2006 19:54:15 GMT Received: from snowdrop.home (unknown [86.111.164.202]) by outmail.freedom2surf.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A39DD505A6 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 2006 19:54:15 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 19:54:10 +0000 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for November Message-ID: <20061106195410.7157ddbf@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <1162841820.10506.42.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> References: <20061101134037.6F126649AC@smtp.gentoo.org> <200611050530.43128.vapier@gentoo.org> <454DBF5F.50408@gentoo.org> <200611050545.09640.vapier@gentoo.org> <454DC709.2000905@gentoo.org> <454DDAC3.4030208@gentoo.org> <1162841820.10506.42.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.5.6 (GTK+ 2.10.6; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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; boundary="Sig_=Rkdrs_0iG91eatWG14FKsb"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 14c95c69-1be6-4b79-9e50-b8b80e008bf9 X-Archives-Hash: 4d37558c66a0f93c69f3597183091669 --Sig_=Rkdrs_0iG91eatWG14FKsb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 14:37:00 -0500 Chris Gianelloni wrote: | So because you didn't like the answer from the people responsible for | this, you'd rather go over their heads and try to bring this up to the | council, so we can override their decisions? Not bloody likely. Isn't that part of why the Council is there? To make decisions on things where some people consider that those normally in charge of something are doing it incorrectly and refusing to fix things? Not saying that either side is right here... But there're a lot of objections to SPF out there, several people complaining and no justification from infra beyond "we're using it anyway". --=20 Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ as-needed is broken : http://ciaranm.org/show_post.pl?post_id=3D13 --Sig_=Rkdrs_0iG91eatWG14FKsb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFT5Lk96zL6DUtXhERAnuPAJ9S50VaUTkOPfdgIl54FBJ9HgcvqACeIECB Q4sK8Yu4eFGocNyVNCm+I0U= =qEYe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_=Rkdrs_0iG91eatWG14FKsb-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list