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 3A0D013827E for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:51:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0BC54E0ACE; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:51:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from andre.telenet-ops.be (andre.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF1F8E0AA0 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:51:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by andre.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id Hbro1n00Q2khLEN01broig; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:51:49 +0100 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:50:40 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: peter@stuge.se Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Message-ID: <20140124005040.350249c9@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <20140123224228.1780.qmail@stuge.se> References: <52D5F0BF.3060305@gentoo.org> <20140115024604.GA3952@laptop.home> <20140115232804.1c26beda@kruskal.home.chead.ca> <20140116234442.27c361d1@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140119143157.72fc0e91@kruskal.home.chead.ca> <20140120014713.2cafc257@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140123181242.GA17827@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20140123201333.71e52bfc@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <1390510534.14914.22.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> <20140123233806.4709abd5@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140123224228.1780.qmail@stuge.se> 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_/JFREGqk3nDC4UWNYDw+/M6p"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: ffb055ce-5a8c-4617-9be1-93db28b3e282 X-Archives-Hash: d9a35229749466c6455f399a9be4acce --Sig_/JFREGqk3nDC4UWNYDw+/M6p Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:42:28 +0100 Peter Stuge wrote: > Tom Wijsman wrote: > > you shoot down solutions >=20 > Maybe it wasn't a very good solution that deserved to be shot down. Maybe it was; what is needed here, is the feedback that makes it better. Work towards a very good solution deserves more than a plain /dev/null; if they end up in /dev/null when provided, solutions appear unwelcome. Constructivism has to come from both sides to have an useful discussion. --=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_/JFREGqk3nDC4UWNYDw+/M6p Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS4arQAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9NtcH/RSSSO447U5yhk1fDea5hqo3 XZy0ccDZBZAEMgVeXnZoEYfP+rJF6pN2Wgoqh0Gdull0XngvCGnk6HpByjiGAMra vTkmt9/Q3pWNTBZDkJ64+VM9zMtp2LIdCwKWfJ3pYEqEdc1kmsrXpQJIbjdWN/SK NCpDrTryUlpZxfPq/VYOZGhjZ7EjDXxQwZGMKs1MPYaQ3tnaW21HBYO3uX4jqxeO 543vX5WeiKy50TMYVi1SlRV/Xk3AQf4gZAjiTQkjJkrJCO9mMB991KbPc8og5PNC QnuVINwe/gW4aLkluHWgZuWyOu3AIZh0FcI1j31ACKR9s6lUNDdazIPQX0RFGe4= =ik5P -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/JFREGqk3nDC4UWNYDw+/M6p--