From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KwTSh-0005gc-Pc for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2008 03:17:12 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 635CEE020D; Sun, 2 Nov 2008 03:17:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BC85E020D for ; Sun, 2 Nov 2008 03:17:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.28.2.137] (bl8-76-123.dsl.telepac.pt [85.241.76.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCE4D643A6 for ; Sun, 2 Nov 2008 03:17:08 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <490D1BA2.3050009@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 02:16:50 -0100 From: "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081004) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PMS] Add RESTRICT="distcc" capability References: <200811011357.17258.gengor@gentoo.org> <200811011547.09038.gengor@gentoo.org> <490CE611.2020900@gentoo.org> <200811011829.03758.gengor@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200811011829.03758.gengor@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: ef1d279f-3e6e-44eb-8430-f04e125bfd54 X-Archives-Hash: dcce470110915d50e1d1d7c22e849080 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Gordon Malm wrote: All the technical discussion on the above is perfectly fine, but the way the arguments are being presented and the tone used by both sides is getting arguments into a thin line from becoming flames. Please step back before turning this into another flame festival. > I guess the larger question in all this is why does a third party who has > demonstrated his anti-Hardened (and anti-Gentoo) slant on multiple occasions > define what goes in our PMS? It's not up to a 3rd party to define what will be or not in PMS. Any 3rd party is free to contribute to the discussion (within boundaries), but it's up to the PMs folks to reach agreements about PMS and, or if they can't, up to the Gentoo Council. > Gordon Malm (gengor) > - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / SPARC / KDE -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkkNG6IACgkQcAWygvVEyAKOrgCghGO8W2839jXMaMq9DN3DpWbM JJMAn0PhLDiKoBayr1juI48tzwa8j8Wc =EXnX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----