similar to: Asterisk Infrastructure Move to GitHub

On 1/26/2023 5:16 AM, Antony Stone wrote: > It does not work if it's written in AEL - assigning global variables works, > but the above does not. I've created a JIRA issue[1] for this as well as a proposed patch[2]. Assuming all goes well this should work in future releases. Kind regards, Sean 1. https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-30406 2.

On 11/19/19 9:09 AM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev wrote: Note there is also Slack, which does not have these problems. Not sure why that keeps being overlooked My understanding is this is because Slack does not have good moderation tools. I'm unfamiliar with further details in this regard. -Hal On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 7:07 AM Zachary Turner <zturner at roblox.com<mailto:zturner at

But is it better or worse than IRC in this regard? On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 10:49 PM Daniel Chapiesky via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Daniel Chapiesky <dchapiesky2 at gmail.com> > Date: Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 1:48 AM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Moving toward Discord and Discourse for >

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 11:32 AM David Tellenbach via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > +1 from my side for using "faster" or "more direct" communication channels > such > as Discord (no strong opinion on the choice of any particular tool here) > for > informal chats and discussions on a "support level". This is

Issues and Code Contribution are moving to GitHub this weekend!! Both issues.asterisk.org and gerrit.asterisk.org will be going read-only at noon EDT (UTC-4:00) Friday April 28th. Within a few hours, the capability to create issues in GitHub at https://github.com/asterisk/asterisk should be available. The ability to accept pull requests may not be available until Monday morning because we

Issues and Code Contribution are moving to GitHub this weekend!! Both issues.asterisk.org and gerrit.asterisk.org will be going read-only at noon EDT (UTC-4:00) Friday April 28th. Within a few hours, the capability to create issues in GitHub at https://github.com/asterisk/asterisk should be available. The ability to accept pull requests may not be available until Monday morning because we

David, I'm glad you mentioned Discord's T&Cs. I'm not generally concerned about these kinds of things, but Discord's seems particularly aggressive. Particularly the phrase "perpetual, nonexclusive, transferable, royalty-free, sublicensable, and worldwide license" is... a lot. Since LLVM is a permissively licensed project I assume many of our contributors care about

There *are* open-source Discord clients, 3rd party tools and the like. The corporation behind Discord is just not authorising you legally to use any of those tools at hand. There are rarely any technical barriers or countermeasures, though. Roman Lebedev via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2019. nov. 18., H, 16:08): > On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 4:10 PM Nico Weber via

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Manuel Jacob via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 2016-05-31 22:45, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: > >> On May 31, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 31 May 2016 at 21:28, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: >>>

On 31 May 2016 at 21:28, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > Ideally, I'd prefer the cross-repository to be handled with an extra layer, in a way similar as described in: https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/user-submodules.htm (somehow conceptually similar to Android manifests XML files). > It would be easy to have tooling/scripts for llvm that would

FWIW I'm a fan of using open-source stuff for open-source projects. Discourse looks open source, but Discord doesn't as far as I can tell (?). On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 3:15 AM Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev < cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hello folks, > > I sent the message quoted below to llvm-dev@ just now, but it applies to > the whole community so sending an FYI

> > | mailing lists for longer-form discussions are unfamiliar, difficult, > and often intimidating for newcomers > > Um… what? While I know (via my own children) that folks nowadays use > multiple avenues of communication, it’s **really** hard to imagine email > as a **mechanism** being unfamiliar/difficult/intimidating. Moving to a > new mechanism wouldn’t alter the

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 7:00 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > I don't have much personal interest here - but my understanding was > that there was/is a fair bit of pushback to fragmenting the > communications channels to discord before there's a more general > buy-in to switch over across the project? (perhaps I'm misremembering > the previous

Hi all, As you're all aware (we sent multiple mails in the last year about this), CentOS 7 and Stream 8 will go EOL soon : https://blog.centos.org/2023/04/end-dates-are-coming-for-centos-stream-8-and-centos-linux-7/ Let's lists some things that will happen on the CentOS Infrastructure as we'll be approching (or passed) these dates : # CentOS 7/8s content itself Usual process :

The lists are working well for the people who are already invested in the community though - as was identified by Chandler they aren't working as well for new people. I'm an insanely confident Scotsman with just about zero fear of any/all social situations, and I've always found this mailing list to be utterly terrifying (thus I've been a 10 year mostly-lurker). My fear

On Jun 2, 2020, at 9:54 PM, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: > This was a mistake, fixed. > > I missed that this was changed, I was excited about a Discourse category for this! In particular the second point of the doc points at llvm-dev@ being a problem as the current forum for such discussions. > If Discourse is a no-go (?), then having a separate mailing-list would

Hi all, We’ve been having discussions over the last few weeks with stakeholders both inside and outside of AMD about where we could best have a dedicated and open discussion space for topics around the AMDGPU target. The conclusion was that we’d like to try the use of a category in the LLVM Discourse group, which is mostly used for MLIR discussion so far. I have started a Discourse topic with

Hi Richard, We've added zero and flush functionality to imageio-daemon. You can download and test the latest build (for el7/fc) from: - http://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-imageio_master_build-artifacts-el7-x86_64/200/artifact/exported-artifacts/ - http://jenkins.ovirt.org/job/ovirt-imageio_master_build-artifacts-fc27-x86_64/53/artifact/exported-artifacts/ -

Hi, do we know what happens with the images at major hyperscalers and when? I?m interested specifically about GCP. Who is in charge of centos-cloud project in GCP? You or Google? $ gcloud compute images describe centos-stream-8-v20240312 --project centos-cloud architecture: X86_64 archiveSizeBytes: '7072654848' creationTimestamp: '2024-03-12T11:46:50.983-07:00' description:

Well, that sounds pretty straight forward. I can do this and push it to gerrit. Do I need to create a ticket for this? With best regards Florian Floimair Innovation - Software-Development COMMEND INTERNATIONAL GMBH A-5020 Salzburg, Saalachstraße 51 http://www.commend.com <http://www.commend.com/> Security and Communication by Commend FN 178618z | LG Salzburg Am 22.08.19, 11:55