On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 17:53, Neels J Hofmeyr <neels_at_elego.de> wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 07:42, Hyrum K. Wright
>> <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>>> On Feb 19, 2010, at 12:37 PM, Neels J Hofmeyr wrote:
>>>
>>>> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>>>> Google No Reply CodeSite wrote:
>>>>>> Status: New
>>>>>> Owner: ----
>>>>>> Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
>>>>>>
>>>>>> New issue 1 by adrian.wills: Just need general help!?
>>>>>> http://code.google.com/p/svnhelp/issues/detail?id=1
>>>>> Uh ... we have yet another community to monitor? When did this 'svnhelp'
>>>>> project come about?
>>>> Hmm, looks to me like svnhelp should be disintegrated, no offense, Greg. It
>>>> is out of date: "Right now, the working copy is at format 12" and I humbly
>>>> expect that it won't be updated anytime soon.
>>>>
>>>> It is a tempting thought to manage our notes in a wiki rather than in
>>>> $svnrepos/trunk/notes. But is it worth the trouble? I'm -0.5.
>>> Agreed. Folks can put content where they will, but spamming the issues mailing list should only be done by "approved" sources.
>>
>> I call bullshit. At any point, I can compose a new message and send it
>> to issues@. So what if "I" send one thru automated mechanisms?
>>
>> -g
>
> Counter bullshit. It's a service for the masses to automatically send
> messages to issues@, who should probably rather contact users@ in person. A
> fan is approaching...
>
> But you said it's going away anyway. No need to plaster each other ;)
All right. Fine, and done.
But if anybody ever throws out the phrase "approved sources", then I'm
going to get cranky again. Again.
-g
Received on 2010-02-20 06:30:46 CET