search for: debating

...on. Said person should also specify a time Wednesday to discuss it on IRC either before or after Xiph's monthly meeting. This is not to say that such changes cannot be reverted. libogg2 is not released yet and there will be pleanty of time for more debate for those who are interested in debating the nuts and bolts. However, this *WILL* represent the direction and basis for development to continue toward the goal of getting a public release, so if you have an objection, it would be appreciated to state it now. Again, discussion should continue on the ogg-dev list. Not vorbis-dev, #Vo...

...on. Said person should also specify a time Wednesday to discuss it on IRC either before or after Xiph's monthly meeting. This is not to say that such changes cannot be reverted. libogg2 is not released yet and there will be pleanty of time for more debate for those who are interested in debating the nuts and bolts. However, this *WILL* represent the direction and basis for development to continue toward the goal of getting a public release, so if you have an objection, it would be appreciated to state it now. Again, discussion should continue on the ogg-dev list. Not vorbis-dev, #Vo...

...on. Said person should also specify a time Wednesday to discuss it on IRC either before or after Xiph's monthly meeting. This is not to say that such changes cannot be reverted. libogg2 is not released yet and there will be pleanty of time for more debate for those who are interested in debating the nuts and bolts. However, this *WILL* represent the direction and basis for development to continue toward the goal of getting a public release, so if you have an objection, it would be appreciated to state it now. Again, discussion should continue on the ogg-dev list. Not vorbis-dev, #Vo...

...on. Said person should also specify a time Wednesday to discuss it on IRC either before or after Xiph's monthly meeting. This is not to say that such changes cannot be reverted. libogg2 is not released yet and there will be pleanty of time for more debate for those who are interested in debating the nuts and bolts. However, this *WILL* represent the direction and basis for development to continue toward the goal of getting a public release, so if you have an objection, it would be appreciated to state it now. Again, discussion should continue on the ogg-dev list. Not vorbis-dev, #Vo...

...on. Said person should also specify a time Wednesday to discuss it on IRC either before or after Xiph's monthly meeting. This is not to say that such changes cannot be reverted. libogg2 is not released yet and there will be pleanty of time for more debate for those who are interested in debating the nuts and bolts. However, this *WILL* represent the direction and basis for development to continue toward the goal of getting a public release, so if you have an objection, it would be appreciated to state it now. Again, discussion should continue on the ogg-dev list. Not vorbis-dev, #Vo...

I'm looking for a solution to provide a live stream of the debate on Sofware Patents in Monday's EU Council of Ministers [1]. Here's what I've in mind: * Council --> mobile phone --> software answering machine --> Internet server * Council --> mobile phone --> VOIP --> Internet server Has anyone ever streamed something via a cell phone? How would you realize

I'm just a causual reader of the vorbis@xiph.org list and lately its been flooded with this tagging debate(and the what, 5 threads its spawned?). I think that it is getting way out of hand. I personally don't have anything against the proposal(though i'm not for it) but lately I've been getting double the number of messages I usually do and its really starting to tick me

Currently there is a mixture of indented namespaces and un-indented namespaces in both LLVM and Clang. I think this is confusing and it wastes developer time debating the issue. I'd like to pick one and stick with it consistently. Indenting cannot possibly work in many contexts -- file-wide namespaces just make no sense to indent. So I don't think we should pick "always indent". The common pattern to indent is when there is a small body of co...

Hello everyone, I have been using R to do some behavioural economic analysis for my masters thesis, specifically fitting demand curves using nls. E.g. Formula: y ~ c + b * x - a * exp(x) Parameters: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) c -0.445097 0.080823 -5.507 0.005304 ** b -0.777105 0.059528 -13.054 0.000199 *** a 0.011908 0.003886 3.064 0.037495 * --- Signif.

Dear R Developers, First of all, I would like to thank you Jeroen Ooms for taking the binary Window Builds from Duncan. I firmly believe that the R Community will benefit a lot from his work. However, the debate I would like to open is about if some of Microsoft R Open Code shall be ported from R Open to Mainstream R. There are some beneficts in R Open such as multithreaded performance:

...Solely to mbox. In fact, I even said that stuff that talks to maildir, in addition to Cyrus, offered the one thing for IMAP you could not get with mbox until Dovecot came along; something resembling robust dealing with multiple clients to the same mbox store. Nor am I particularly insterested in debating the merits of any format over mbox, a format I have stated I -KNOW- has annoying technical limitations and issues. While I would imagine other formats may have advantages over mbox, I continue to use mbox simply because of the sheer amount of stored mail I have accumulated on all my machines for t...

Hello all, Quick question (possibly!) - I''ve got a few records indexed and doing a search for ''test'' reports in no hits even though I know the word ''tests'' exists in the indexed field. Doing a search for ''tests'' produces a result. I would have thought that ''test'' would match ''tests'' but no such

User here: incorporating Intel's MKL, as MRO does, would be a very welcome addition. I was an MRO user before and it improved my experience with medium data immensely. They did, however, leave behind bugs here and there, especially related to development with Rcpp, so I switched back to vanilla R. On Mon, Oct 30, 2017, 9:42 AM Juan Telleria <jtelleriar at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear

So as long as I can read, OpenBlas, for Windows, might be a worth considering option: http://www.openblas.net But Intel MKL also seems to be free*: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/free-mkl Thank you, Juan El 30/10/2017 6:45 p. m., "Avraham Adler" <avraham.adler at gmail.com> escribi?: > [Sent offlist accidentally] > > What concerns me first and foremost is

[Sent offlist accidentally] What concerns me first and foremost is that the licensure would have to be ironclad (including for commercial use like vanilla R now) as well as ensuring that R remains completely FLOSS. Anything ?added? to R has to be a no-strings-attached gift to R. Also, I would think that it would have to play nice with existing workflows (like OpenBLAS instead of MKL) unless

On 29 October 2017 at 22:01, Kenny Bell wrote: | User here: incorporating Intel's MKL, as MRO does, would be a very welcome | addition. | | I was an MRO user before and it improved my experience with medium data | immensely. | | They did, however, leave behind bugs here and there, especially related to | development with Rcpp, so I switched back to vanilla R. With all due respect: You may

Estimados Sobre el registros, por estos lados el registro es o no es necesario, depende la persona, en otros términos, supongamos que pinto un cuadro, lo coloco en las redes sociales, hay publicación, pero luego aparece en la tapa de una revista muy cara, en ese caso hay registros que dicen que soy el autor, puedo reclamar, sin embargo estaría complicado que alguien acepte que yo pinte La

Guys. Im reading a lot about ser, nat, stun, etc. And I noticed there are a lot of ways to get around nat but I would like to hear some success stories about handling nat users with multiple voip phones behind nat. I have my asterisk box behind but ports are forwarded (5060 5004 10000-20000 for rtp and 4569 for iax2) but still.. I can quite figure out what ser and stund have to do on this

..., information, references, or anything else *will* lead to a discussion, which shouldn't take place here. If you want such information and to understand it, you should discuss it with a lawyer. This mailing list is for technical discussion. Let's keep it that way. If you want to continue debating the semantics of this or whether or not to discuss it on this list (something that seems a truly pointless meta discussion), I'm asking you to take even that debate off the list so that we can remain focused on the original question: C++11 features in LLVM and Clang. -------------- next part --...

On 28 Nov 2012, at 17:02, Tanya Lattner wrote: >> 14116 - Inliner incorrectly combines cleanup and catch landing pads > > I think this one can be moved out as a release blocker. Too much debate and no action on the bug in over a month. This bug means that we can't compile at anything over -O1, or we get code that does the wrong thing (e.g. terminate instead of catching an