pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] pmmgr pmlogger default behaviour

To: Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] pmmgr pmlogger default behaviour
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 17:04:20 -0500 (EST)
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <52FD3940.5010304@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <2108905700.15892281.1391033827018.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> <1178788786.16735370.1391119719356.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> <y0mob2l2e67.fsf@xxxxxxxx> <1557539857.20737008.1391680756568.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> <20140206133220.GC5017@xxxxxxxxxx> <633105491.21839148.1391757935531.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> <1095368295.6085212.1392272562364.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <52FD3940.5010304@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: J48kPAKJ5LsjKnQAzRuAqTXI7Mognw==
Thread-topic: pmmgr pmlogger default behaviour

----- Original Message -----
> On 13/02/14 17:22, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > Hi Frank,
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >>> ...
> >> I'll stew on this over the weekend, and attempt to come up with some
> >> possible directions forward for us here, seeking compromise.  It feels
> >> a bit like we're going in circles by email here now, and we need a new
> >> tack as we're stale-mated on each others needs/concerns.
> 
> Is this the trigger for a PCP developer's conference call/meeting?  We
> haven't had one in quite a while.

Yeah, well overdue - I was hoping Mark would be back on deck before teeing
up the next one, as he had a keen interest in unifying contexts also.  But
we may have to go ahead without him for now, and I'll fill him in later.

If everyone interested can send preferred days of the week, it'll be early
morning in .au EST +11, mid-arvo Toronto time and pot luck everywhere else
based on past experiences of what works best.

cheers.

--
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>