[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?
From: |
James Blackwell |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0? |
Date: |
Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:11:04 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.11 |
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 02:54:48AM -0700, Andy Tai wrote:
> James I don't think this is an issue here. Arch was of Tom's design and
> Arch 2.0 is still Tom's design. So it is great that Tom is leading the
> discussion and if Tom wants to push Arch 2.0 forward I am all for it.
>
> I have kept tla alive, but for major advancements Tom is the best person to
> push for them and to lead the community to achieve them. (Yes, I still keep
> tla alive. Tla is not going anywhere but won't see any big changes either)
I understand. Good luck to the gnuarch team. I bet you guys will do
great.
Whoever's supposed to be in charge of the website -- please email me
directly (I'm no longer on the list) about moving http://gnuarch.org off
of my machine.
Regards,
James
>
> On 4/23/06, James Blackwell <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Andy has done a very good job running GnuArch. He communicates well, is
> > skilled at avoiding minefields on this list, is open to ideas from
> > everyone on the group and seeks consensus. I nominate Andy Tai to stay in
> > charge of GnuArch.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Gnu-arch-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
>
> GNU arch home page:
> http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
--
My home page: <a href="http://jblack.linuxguru.net">James Blackwell</a>
Gnupg 06357400 F-print AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D 247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, Peter Conrad, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, Ludovic Courtès, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, Peter Conrad, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, Karel Gardas, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, John Arbash Meinel, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, Thomas Lord, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, James Blackwell, 2006/04/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, Thomas Lord, 2006/04/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, James Blackwell, 2006/04/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, Andy Tai, 2006/04/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?,
James Blackwell <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, Andy Tai, 2006/04/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0?, Thomas Lord, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0? (was re: Google...), Matteo Settenvini, 2006/04/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0? (was re: Google...), Aldrik KLEBER, 2006/04/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0? (was re: Google...), Peter Conrad, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0? (was re: Google...), Thomas Lord, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] planning 2.0? (was re: Google...), Thomas Lord, 2006/04/21
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: planning 2.0? (was re: Google...), Nathaniel Smith, 2006/04/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: planning 2.0? (was re: Google...), Thomas Lord, 2006/04/21