similar to: Speex users survey -- please complete it

Hey All Capital Factory is organizing a Hackathon in conjuction with LSRC 6. If you want to attend, please cast your votes on the survey link below. http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/BFYFJBJ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to

We have free text answers for both groups of answers, usage and impact. People can write whatever they want there. I don't see what the problem is... Cheers, Renato On 24 Aug 2016 8:01 p.m., "Mehdi Amini" <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > > On Aug 19, 2016, at 4:23 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > >

> On Aug 19, 2016, at 1:50 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > > On 19 August 2016 at 19:38, Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com> wrote: >> Let people name a representative person that maintains the infrastructure of their group/organisation? > > So, a radio button to choose "me" vs "my company/project"? Or let them >

I have created a survey to try to understand who is interested in wxRuby, how people are using it (or want to use it), and how we can focus our development efforts to improve the project. Please take a few minutes to respond: http://rubyforge.org/survey/survey.php?group_id=35&survey_id=4 Thanks! Kevin

So, for the past couple of days the SurveyMonkey results are not changing, with 13 replies overall. Should we wait for more or everyone passionate enough has already spoken? In practice I'd likely follow up on a weekend anyway, but... the weekend is coming! :) Currently we have a clear leader pair that collected almost half the votes (6), two votes were to keep old words in place - alas,

So, for the past couple of days the SurveyMonkey results are not changing, with 13 replies overall. Should we wait for more or everyone passionate enough has already spoken? In practice I'd likely follow up on a weekend anyway, but... the weekend is coming! :) Currently we have a clear leader pair that collected almost half the votes (6), two votes were to keep old words in place - alas,

> I think it might be good to draw a clearer line between the > contributor and their organization. I suspect Apple's infrastructure > will be far more affected by the change than I will personally and > there's not really a way to fit that information into the current > survey. > > Tim. Excellent point. Sony's infrastructure pain would be significant to those

Folks, I've created the survey with the feedback I got on the "Voting" thread in the llvm-foundation list, and put it here: https://goo.gl/forms/k4J7M3N7oLNTOlDq2 Apparently, I can't allow people to comment on the form itself. It's either full permission or nothing. So, I think the best way to do this is to do a review on the list, with my most sincere apologies to the

Thanks again for all the suggestions. For now I've prepared draft PRs, mostly to map out where the changes are needed - based on my earlier work with the originally proposed terminology. Now that we know where to change it, should not be too great a hassle to replace again by some other choice... subordinate was a bit too long to type :) To make the election of team choice more simple, I

Thanks again for all the suggestions. For now I've prepared draft PRs, mostly to map out where the changes are needed - based on my earlier work with the originally proposed terminology. Now that we know where to change it, should not be too great a hassle to replace again by some other choice... subordinate was a bit too long to type :) To make the election of team choice more simple, I

FYI: PR https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/1328 adds handling of `PRIMARY` alias to `MASTER` on protocol side, hopefully completing the puzzle for issue #840. Reviews and testing would be welcome :) On Sun, Mar 14, 2021, 00:34 Jim Klimov <jimklimov+nut at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks again for all the suggestions. > > For now I've prepared draft PRs, mostly to map out

FYI: PR https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/1328 adds handling of `PRIMARY` alias to `MASTER` on protocol side, hopefully completing the puzzle for issue #840. Reviews and testing would be welcome :) On Sun, Mar 14, 2021, 00:34 Jim Klimov <jimklimov+nut at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks again for all the suggestions. > > For now I've prepared draft PRs, mostly to map out

Thanks, overal the survey LGTM; as for: > On Aug 19, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 19 August 2016 at 18:37, Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: >> Excellent point. Sony's infrastructure pain would be significant to >> those of us having to implement the conversion, but that change would

On 19 August 2016 at 19:35, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote: > I think you misunderstood what I meant here. Whether "moving to git" > will affect my workflow depends very much on "how we're moving to > git". That's exactly what I understood. :) > For example, if we do a monorepo, I may now need to lay code out > differently on my

Hi Chris, Bear in mind that the more questions we have, the harder it will be to interpret the results. If we have 20+ questions, it'll be impossible to understand anything. Also, the multiple choice questions are meant as a guide to understand "how many" people fall into one or another category, while the free text ones are meant to complement and give technical reasons for their

Hey All, For those of you that do not know me, my name is Matthew Fredrickson and I’m the project lead for the Asterisk project. First off, I wanted to thank all of you that contribute in various ways to the project – whether it be at a developmental level, answering questions on forums and mailing lists, contributing documentation, or just generally advocating for it within your sphere of

Hi everyone, As you may have guess, Speex 1.2 is slowly approaching, though there's still a lot left to do so I can't say how long it'll take. I thought this was the right time to ask if there's anything missing or that can be improved to make 1.2 better. At this point, it can't be anything major, but there are still some changes that are possible, e.g: - Improving some

Hi everyone, Predictive Analytics World's program for Feb 18-19 in San Francisco (www.predictiveanalyticsworld.com) has grown a bit since my post several weeks ago, and is looking better than ever. The conference covers today's commercial deployment of predictive analytics, across industries and across software vendors. In a nutshell, PAW is a warehouse of case studies. In breaking

Hello Jean-Denis. I believe the idea is that you answer the survey for each type of scenarios you are running. So one for call centre, another one for ivr, etc... Regards, Marcelo On Mon, 11 Mar 2019, 02:10 Jean-Denis Girard, <jd.girard at sysnux.pf> wrote: > Hi Matt, > > I would have loved to participate to the survey, but I feel it does > apply to my situation: as an

> The mode/bit-rate is detected automatically by the decoder because it's > encoded in the first few bits of each frame. The encoder can change > bit-rate at any time without telling the decoder. Can you be more > precise as to what isn't clear? I think that one got me too. If mode is detected automatically by the decoder, what is the purpose of the 'mode' parameter