libc borked

[Richard Mancusi]

On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Stephan Hermann <sh at sourcecode.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>  Richard Mancusi wrote:
>  > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Brian Murray <brian at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>  >>  One thing this, and some other events, has made me think about is - how
>  >>  are new community members supposed to know who someone is and what their
>  >>  contributions to Ubuntu have been?  We have a developer responsibilities
>  >>  wiki page[1] perhaps we should publicize it more and flesh it out.  As I
>  >>  personally have a hard time keeping people's irc nicks, launchpad
>  >>  usernames and real names connected, I'm adding irc nicks to that page
>  >>  too.
>  >>
>  >>  What other ways can we help new community members identify people
>  >>  involved in Ubuntu development?
>  >>
>  >
>  > senders email signature line ... short description of responsibilities and area
>  > of expertise - this will help all list members place value on the reply
>
>  For what?
>

To identify the skill level of the individual who replied.  Wasn't I clear?

"... this will help all list members place value on the reply ..."

>  "Hello, I'm this guy, who does that and now you have to respect my mail,
>  because I'm someone who is doing a lot more for Ubuntu then you?"
>
>  Actually this occasion happened in a development cycle which is intended
>  to break. Everbody who is using a development relase knows exactly that
>  this can happen always until release.
>
>  So there is no need for fingerpointing...We found the bugger, the
>  solution is quite clear and for the next time, we know now what we have
>  to do (as Colin and I were discussing). Yes, we all make mistakes, so what.
>

I don't remember anyone saying they were trying to fingerpoint.

>  To identify who is who doesn't help with all that.
>
>  Regards,
>
>  \sh

Obviously you and I took the op completely different.  I could care less
about pointing a finger.  It is Alpha software - stuff happens.  I fixed
mine just fine, even without the help.  My mistake, I didn't realize folks
were still arguing about "the incident".

Actually I wondered why a new thread wasn't created for the op
question.  Now I know - it apparently is the same thread.

I wasn't involved in the original discussion and choose not to comment
on it.  However, if this is a new thread, I stand on my suggestion.  Yes,
I would like to know the quality of a reply and I would base it on my
above stated criteria.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.  I will butt out and allow you folks to
return to the argument.

-rich