From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36D8D138334 for ; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 19:44:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E6AD2E088B; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 19:44:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (mail.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA2C6E0871 for ; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 19:44:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from symphony.aura-online.co.uk (154.189.187.81.in-addr.arpa [81.187.189.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: chewi) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E534234B46D for ; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 19:44:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:43:53 +0100 From: James Le Cuirot To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [RFC] Undertakers: appeal policy Message-ID: <20190921204353.6239c5a1@symphony.aura-online.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <109eea13088507d0b4dd87da6d3463e75ae07e84.camel@gentoo.org> References: <3aab702403d9a7e0bf7246f14a5130acd464ca45.camel@gentoo.org> <20190921105536.2764e1e6@symphony.aura-online.co.uk> <8C6FAD3C-F48F-4B2D-98A5-0CD5CDEF1DF9@gentoo.org> <109eea13088507d0b4dd87da6d3463e75ae07e84.camel@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.4 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/la=tHGYZaY.Xhh5qY+.Prrx"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 X-Archives-Salt: 010e5c05-b358-4537-8a03-dc1740660f44 X-Archives-Hash: eca6c69084bab489f2949ecfee51d800 --Sig_/la=tHGYZaY.Xhh5qY+.Prrx Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 20:48:29 +0200 Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > That's just to correct things. Now, guys, can we please stay on topic?=20 > I welcome all your support but of the three replies so far, nobody has > provided any opinion on the proposal in question. I was implying that it was good with the "thanks" but yes, I should have been clearer. It works for me. --=20 James Le Cuirot (chewi) Gentoo Linux Developer --Sig_/la=tHGYZaY.Xhh5qY+.Prrx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEPxcZ3tkwcedKm2a8EiZBXQDdMTcFAl2GfXkACgkQEiZBXQDd MTcbDRAAiUUZNCREGBIF7x8x2xs0vYRsyzVzYlwHLC2rrshOMKsDGQU0cPTsyRaN unoG/3GYdMx7bjpPvZ25KLaaSnm2TJROvjTJ4GfC6c8V/Y9LAplZkXPEfhWzQb1o +yys/nsSaMetW0quoqiFHYc6WvEEI7ER9H36EIR+KcVu3zt6ujEIblaeHwtdnvk8 OY4ptb/LzMjdVxis2tuuF2zDuP6ncwIZA9yBUy44PSyL//3M/xLVki0EyNiLuB3+ +PlSaUMWajpJ1oDvJBOPtx25rzXvOLO5Dlglm1BcLJrBX/e0QDn305m6zFD2SPII dNcg6F9TPRx32Q2mCWxfmcmZQmBOu46b4X2rlfHa8t6Jv0n2alJiCr90Se6/iocY /cMN1FXpnZaKrTaVv9fa7xmfcks4/GFHp44uQPhHoploQPlgs1Bujt7fBFe01/PE 6Ik5wMAXqx0rPCzL2fLnzsvInYydoRgT2s9F5Adx9k+2kKPch778wuO0FqOjDPg0 tunB5nRoUPQexz6MqN9o0IgPqzr6H2ysY+vz7jU+btRDcjSVcmKldh46VHdp3vVP RyZQ+JtJPY8NK3Ywwinptktc309BiGmwUWjTC3sl+41K5I4ijuY4jNXYPgsDakqH 7A2R5NtvX4KCyMhdf+ZBxcMm7WCzZYWDu1CcQ/QsqEdLXcvPX5Y= =a5ro -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/la=tHGYZaY.Xhh5qY+.Prrx--