On 10/13/2011 09:38 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 09:10 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> At least I do not want to this list to become a newbie forum nor "yet
> another source" of review spam.
Well, if you consider tibbs, rex, sochotnicky or toshio (people who have
mentionned to be interested in the SIG) to be newbie then I guess we are
Except of you and sochotnicky, I know all of them.
If you do not consider them to be newbie then I would
invite you to read again what's the idea behind this SIG.
Yes, may-be I should read it for the n-th time. Openly said, I don't see
much sense in such a SIG, but I didn't want to take away your favorite toy.
> You might not want to hear this, but to me personally, the
> the bureaucrazy's (typo intended) noise on package-review@ already is
> beyond "being bearable".
Again, we do not want to duplicate/replicate/have anything in common
Or you have to tell me how I can try to be more clear.
So ... what do you want to
Problems within a review belong into the review, general/fundamental
problems belong on this list rsp. in front of the FPC, ... I don't
understand hat are you aiming at, except that you are intending to
implement the (n+1)th body in fedora.