[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: X Strike Force XFree86 SVN commit: rev 1002 - /



On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 12:10:10PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> 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.

No, I was asking for an update to this. See two paragraphs up.

> > 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 didn't demand, I queried; I found it odd that the workrate just
suddenly dropped massively without warning.

> > 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'm not saying *that* laggy. Look at the next commit (1003, I believe),
which clarified things a little. My point was that I sent off the mail
before the log for 1003 arrived.

> > (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.

What is the current status of blocker items of 4.3.0-1 into unstable?
Has it changed?

> > 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:
> 
> [irrelevant]
> 
> I hope you're not trying to tell me Australia's timezone offset from
> necrotic.deadbeast.net is on the order of 130 hours.

It's 16, I believe.

> 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.

At the time, the website was not updated with 1003. Also, what makes you
think I can do DCC?

-- 
Daniel Stone                                                <daniels@debian.org>
Debian: the universal operating system                     http://www.debian.org

Attachment: pgpcaSlK12odu.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: