On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 08:17:50PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 12:31:59AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 05:16:07PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > a) it wasn't updated at the time, > > > > Not true. Your mail was dated "Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:50:03 +1100". > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > r998 | branden | 2004-01-29 22:48:07 -0500 (Thu, 29 Jan 2004) | 2 lines > > > > Update and rearrange. The list of 4.3.0-1 items is now specific. > > The mail had not arrived at the time. I'm sure you knew what I meant. If > you didn't, please search for another XFree86 maintainer if it is, as > you say, quite the critical piece of infrastructure. I cannot accept responsibility for the speed of Debian mailing list delivery to your personal mailbox. The mailing list archives are available, and generally lag the actual list traffic by considerably less than 5 and a half days. > > > b) you know full well I can't get svn:// out. Remember the endless > > > discussions about eventually getting it working through SSH? > > > > Actually, I had forgotten. However, you're a Debian developer now, so > > you have access to several machines, some of which should have svn > > installed, so you can always check the logs from there. > > You have a memory like a sieve, and a selective one at that. And yes, I > could use it from any number of machines, but they're all in the US, and > I don't like triply-bouncing when I'm on 56k to begin with. It's kind of > hard to do anything interactive, really. Then don't send insistent emails demanding a high level of interactivity from others. > I asked for something that was not, as far as I could ascertain at the > time, done. It turns out it was, thanks to the tyranny of terrible > mailing lists ...and which you could just as easily have determined by visiting <URL: http://necrotic.deadbeast.net/xsf/XFree86/CHANGELOG.txt >. Particularly if you knew Debian list delivery was laggy for you. > (I believe the next commit was the relevant one It was impossible to determine what you were really asking for. "Has the patch status been updated yet?" To reflect what? Don't tell me it was clear from context. All you quoted was a news item announcing 4.3.0-1 status. No gory particulars were mentioned. > - if it wasn't, then a "no further progressions" was what I was after. > I'm sure you're smart enough to figure this out - if not, please refer > to my first paragraph.) Sorry, I guess I'll just have to live with being an idiot in your eyes. > > The cumulative changelog is also updated every 24 hours, and is > > available via any web browser that understands HTTP and plain text. > > Yes, every 24 hours. And when I checked, I couldn't see that it was > updated in Subversion. You said you didn't check Subversion, and wouldn't because it's too difficult for you. Let's review: > > Your mail was dated "Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:50:03 +1100". > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > r998 | branden | 2004-01-29 22:48:07 -0500 (Thu, 29 Jan 2004) | 2 lines > > > > Update and rearrange. The list of 4.3.0-1 items is now specific. Since the daily website update scripts run at midnight UTC-0500, this changelog entry would have been visible at http://necrotic.deadbeast.net/xsf/XFree86/CHANGELOG.txt approximately one hour and twelve minutes after it was made. I hope you're not trying to tell me Australia's timezone offset from necrotic.deadbeast.net is on the order of 130 hours. If you can't use Subversion and refuse to use the Web, then I suggest you ask people on IRC to retreive the information you desire and DCC it to you. > Would you care to thus explain how this paragraph is at all relevant? See above. -- G. Branden Robinson | The Rehnquist Court has never Debian GNU/Linux | encountered a criminal statute it branden@debian.org | did not like. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- John Dean
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature