From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7F77138247 for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 16:50:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 72B4FE0B24; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 16:50:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jacques.telenet-ops.be (jacques.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.50]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FBC0E0B1F for ; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 16:50:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by jacques.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id 74qf1n0022khLEN0J4qfvc; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 17:50:39 +0100 Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 17:50:16 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: hwoarang@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-sound/umurmur: metadata.xml ChangeLog Message-ID: <20131228175016.63457252@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <52BEF1ED.7060207@gentoo.org> References: <20131225095020.A91BE2004C@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <20131226132724.6b9477af@googlemail.com> <52BEEA2D.2020103@gentoo.org> <201312281644.39489.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <52BEF1ED.7060207@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/V8FMCji+hq_4NPJ53YN6jKZ"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: c56d5fb0-2b30-41ab-85aa-0a0275122c9f X-Archives-Hash: e3e84ce344ab67325c923edd8cfee16e --Sig_/V8FMCji+hq_4NPJ53YN6jKZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:44:45 +0000 Markos Chandras wrote: > It certainly isn't to the person who caused the problem Hard to tell from skimming the context, but in his first mail there is an acknowledgment that there was previous communication between both persons; it just appears to be that both of them insist or their view. > so what I am saying is that maybe it's better first to communicate > the problem with him before starting a public heated discussion. Communication is fine; it's been told by repoman, a revert and Patrick. Solutions like pinging every single person for every small change or filing a bug for every single line that could involve QA is a good way to burn out the QA team again or create an useless bug backlog. What really does need a solution here are that "reverts" have happened; it should be a rule that an action cannot be done twice without agreement, to force people to rather constructively discuss it instead. "'Cause I want it that way..." ~ Backstreet Boys --=20 With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D --Sig_/V8FMCji+hq_4NPJ53YN6jKZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSvwFIAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9CKwIALy5v70RunnlQQKBsrNqgr/r 41i1sWN+ar9sTrIXUnHC/7jcgLxZYLgqKpsRZW4P2ygnB7ULEoP/yjM9gQVHeYsP nUDJH/oeEOjY98b/T26i0Sm4d2bxd5YpsgVqjN6SZcNDl+yWT7nBTqAlUPtiO8KE r04Gt0t0lWB/heZEWZCSntZgNw0AMM1mRaLtQgW+oFTaTazEL1JeVppEj/DeJQ2W 6TlLB07bk0zyyWro0hd9D43pNSl4n5R+4lt5j9MDCVhLtBM5VwfB+qyVYA4mKsVI sVWSCpevk2BeLSKXnWfOoSt4ZNFGe5WIy/vKT+etZQeKbQE18PtmlefYGWp+54Q= =beEV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/V8FMCji+hq_4NPJ53YN6jKZ--