Matches for !up, 38725 total results Sorted by newest | relevance
Wed Feb 03 22:28:44 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> i can make as many fuckwhores.vpatch as i want, but only one can end up in any given tree.
Wed Feb 03 22:26:05 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=03-02-2016#1395437 << so if i make a script to fuck whores and i call it fuckwhores.pl and then it's mistaken and abandoned now i'm stuck using sexingsluts.pl instead and if that also gets burned i'll end up doing intromissiveman1pulationofwillingwenches.pl ?
Wed Feb 03 21:36:05 UTC 2016 <BingoBoingo> !up ascii_butugychag
Wed Feb 03 21:04:51 UTC 2016 <mod6> !up ascii_butugychag
Wed Feb 03 20:51:24 UTC 2016 <ascii_butugychag> spins up a whole lisp universe for just a command or two
Wed Feb 03 20:49:51 UTC 2016 <ascii_butugychag> you end up with ONE repl at a time
Wed Feb 03 20:44:23 UTC 2016 <BingoBoingo> Of all the #b-a projects, deedbot's probably up there for frustration induced
Wed Feb 03 20:40:49 UTC 2016 <BingoBoingo> felipelalli: Maybe work up to that. Maybe start by chronicling socialist evils perpetuated by your government
Wed Feb 03 20:39:37 UTC 2016 <BingoBoingo> felipelalli: Find news in Brazil and please to qntra it up.
Wed Feb 03 20:34:15 UTC 2016 <BingoBoingo> !up ascii_butugychag
Wed Feb 03 20:32:40 UTC 2016 <thestringpuller> "[We should see Bitcoin classic use ramp up] after binaries are released. Most people don't want to compile". << These people really shouldn't be involved in Bitcoin. Like going to war without learning to clean gun.
Wed Feb 03 20:03:19 UTC 2016 <mod6> !up ascii_butugychag
Wed Feb 03 19:27:35 UTC 2016 <mod6> !up ascii_butugychag
Wed Feb 03 19:01:25 UTC 2016 <phf> i was trying to see if could look up the corresponding vpatch by decoding the sig's hash, and then assoc into a precomputed map of vpatch hashes. unfortunately openpgp concats the sig header to the payload, so can't precompute :/
Wed Feb 03 18:57:01 UTC 2016 <mod6> !up ascii_butugychag
Wed Feb 03 18:22:08 UTC 2016 <PeterL> !up ascii_butugychag
Wed Feb 03 18:04:28 UTC 2016 <mod6> then if all is good, i'll roll up another publication of the whole thing & call it v99995
Wed Feb 03 18:04:14 UTC 2016 <PeterL> if you have patches a->b->c and you decide to get rid of b, you should end up with a->b->c->(-b), not with a->c' (where c' is reground c without b patch) , do I understand correct?
Wed Feb 03 17:59:38 UTC 2016 <ascii_butugychag> your patches ought to add up to same thing as mine did
Wed Feb 03 17:51:46 UTC 2016 <ascii_butugychag> ~patch submitter~ has the responsibility of coming up with a unique name.