| 1 |
On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 14:55:06 +0800 |
| 2 |
Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 11/23/12 21:17, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 12:45:56 +0800 |
| 6 |
> > Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> >> On 11/20/12 21:57, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 9 |
> >>> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:10:51 +0000 (UTC) |
| 10 |
> >>> "Patrick Lauer (patrick)" <patrick@g.o> wrote: |
| 11 |
> >>> |
| 12 |
> >>>> patrick 12/11/16 09:10:51 |
| 13 |
> >>>> |
| 14 |
> >>>> Modified: ChangeLog |
| 15 |
> >>>> Added: lyx-2.0.5.ebuild |
| 16 |
> >>>> Log: |
| 17 |
> >>>> Bump |
| 18 |
> >>>> |
| 19 |
> >>> |
| 20 |
> >>> |
| 21 |
> >>> |
| 22 |
> >>> While the bump was fine, please read the damn metadata.xml when |
| 23 |
> >>> you touch a package you're not used to. Pavel has been doing a |
| 24 |
> >>> very good job in (proxy) maintaining lyx since years and you do |
| 25 |
> >>> not seem to have contacted him before doing the bump, which is a |
| 26 |
> >>> bit disrespectful for him IMHO. |
| 27 |
> >> |
| 28 |
> >> I disagree. A fix is a fix, a bump is a bump, no ego involved. |
| 29 |
> > |
| 30 |
> > And respect is respect. It's not because you woke up someday in a |
| 31 |
> > special mood that a 4+ years perfectly working workflow will |
| 32 |
> > change... |
| 33 |
> > |
| 34 |
> >> |
| 35 |
> >>> If you want to help in having things done quicker because I'm not |
| 36 |
> >>> always responsive enough, then please do it correctly and ask |
| 37 |
> >>> Pavel to CC you when he sends me instructions for lyx. |
| 38 |
> >> I dislike this territorialism. Why add a single point of failure to |
| 39 |
> >> package maintenance? (What if you or Pavel "disappear" for any |
| 40 |
> >> reason?) |
| 41 |
> > |
| 42 |
> > Ask those who invented maintainers. Take your point to the council. |
| 43 |
> > So far these are the rules, follow them or leave it. |
| 44 |
> > |
| 45 |
> > As for the single point of failure, Pavel being part of upstream |
| 46 |
> > sends me the ebuilds _before_ the actual release. That is not what |
| 47 |
> > I call a failure. The proposal to also be a proxy still stands, but |
| 48 |
> > if you continue with this provocative behavior I'm not sure I want |
| 49 |
> > to work with you... |
| 50 |
> > |
| 51 |
> > A. |
| 52 |
> > |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> "provocative" |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
> Aaaargh. |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
> With that kind of agression from *your* side I might just ignore your |
| 59 |
> input because you're really annoying me. |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
Please stop being childish, thanks. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
> As for packages, all my packages are "Do what you want", with an |
| 64 |
> optional "feel free to notify me if you change something"... |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
Good for you. Please keep in mind that you're not alone in the world |
| 67 |
and that others may have a different workflow. |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
A. |
Archives