Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:33:31
Message-Id: 45F97427.2040702@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml? by Stephen Becker
1 Stephen Becker napsal(a):
2 > First of all, get your facts straight. The bugzilla incident of which
3 > you speak happened before all of this. Second of all, the language is
4 > irrelevant. Point is, he was acting like an asshole to somebody , so
5 > he got abused in return.
6
7 Yeah indeed, lets get the facts straight and let's see who did behave
8 like an asshole:
9
10 http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=110676&action=view
11
12 >> > I would still react loudly to folks pulling a similar stunt now that I
13 >> > *am* retired.
14 >> Hopefully not in the same manner.
15 >
16 > Sometimes people need to be bluntly told to stop screwing up.
17
18 Indeed, so eroyf was told to stop screwing up, he just didn't get it
19 (apparently neither did you, for that matter). And don't start this
20 'mips needs more babysitting' nonsense here again, please.
21
22
23 --
24 Best regards,
25
26 Jakub Moc
27 mailto:jakub@g.o
28 GPG signature:
29 http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
30 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
31
32 ... still no signature ;)

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml? Stephen Becker <spbecker@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml? George Prowse <cokehabit@×××××.com>
[gentoo-dev] OT: Dickheads, but good devs Was: Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml "C. Bergström" <cbergstrom@×××××××××.com>