[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] is there demand for itla?

From: Robert Collins
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] is there demand for itla?
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 14:57:42 +1100

On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 13:20, Tom Lord wrote:

>     > FWIW I was referring to the scheme project behaviour in terms of
>     > resources: headspace, focus time and the like.
> If I'm reading you correctly.... assuming you've been looking at
> recent commits in my archives and so forth..... 
> It's all part of the same thing.   No, really.

Uhm yes - I grokked that. I explained myself badly. (memo to self,
remember to eat).

What I seem to have said is something about spending time on tla vs
'that scheme project'. What I -meant- to say was more like.

Tom, you spend time on whatever you think wisest, thats absolutely cool
with me, as it should be - it's your time. If I'd like you to be doing
other stuff, I'll start a dialog and ask, and failing that simply branch
and start my own code - I've done that before (barch). 

However, if you plan on spending every waking moment with your headspace
'over there', with the arch community starting to back-log patches and
features, then you would help us immensely if you said something like

  "Guys, I'm spending considerable time 'over there' right now, please
  feed patches to my lieutenants, whom I've given increased access to
  the savannah database. I'll be back on deck in a while, and will pick
  up the reigns from there on. Lieutenants, further 1.1 pre snapshots
  are cool, but don't go for 1.2, as I have a few things I want in

(I'm assuming you aren't playing/planing to play a social experiment
with arch's shifting-maintainer-featureset.)

What I found while you where away working on the scheme project was that
things largely ground to a halt here, IMO because the bug tracking
database isn't as peer to peer as arch itself. My integration branch
helps for collecting features, but not for organisation.


GPG key available at: <>.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]