Hello Asheesh, others.
* Asheesh Laroia [Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:47:24 -0800]:
Supporting new drivers means patching the uw-imap source included with
alpine. I believe it makes good sense to instead patch alpine the use
the shared (Debian-patched not-approved-by-Mark Crispin) libc-client
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Adeodato Simó wrote:
Hello Asheesh, others.
* Asheesh Laroia [Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:47:24 -0800]:
Supporting new drivers means patching the uw-imap source included with
alpine. I believe it makes good sense to instead patch alpine the use
the shared (Debian-patched
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 07:47:24PM -0800, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Supporting new drivers means patching the uw-imap source included
with alpine. I believe it makes good sense to instead patch alpine
the
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 04:11:35PM -0800, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Marc Glisse wrote:
Asheesh Laroia:
Ssince uw-imap and alpine are separately released source bundles
from washington.edu, it seems like it'd be easiest to have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 04:11:35PM -0800, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Marc Glisse wrote:
Asheesh Laroia:
Ssince uw-imap and alpine are separately released source bundles
from washington.edu, it seems like it'd be easiest to have
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Marc Glisse wrote:
Asheesh Laroia:
Ssince uw-imap and alpine are separately released source bundles from
washington.edu, it seems like it'd be easiest to have them remain separate
source packages.
uw-imap also appears as the imap subdirectory of the alpine distribution,
Asheesh Laroia:
Ssince uw-imap and alpine are separately released source bundles from
washington.edu, it seems like it'd be easiest to have them remain
separate source packages.
uw-imap also appears as the imap subdirectory of the alpine distribution,
so they can't really be considered as
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Greetings, Asheesh (and others following this conversation),
I don't know if the mailutils packaged as part of uw-imap is better or
worse than yours.
But uw-imap and alpine is quite similar, even in coding style. How would
you like it we maintain
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:53:22PM -0500, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Greetings, Asheesh (and others following this conversation),
I don't know if the mailutils packaged as part of uw-imap is better
or
Package: alpine
Version: 1.0+dfsg-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 6.6(4)
Shipping mailutil (and its manpage) straight up leads to file
conflicts with the uw-mailutils package, which already supplies both.
I'm specifically assigning this to alpine because uw-mailutils has
precedence, but
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
Package: alpine
Version: 1.0+dfsg-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 6.6(4)
Shipping mailutil (and its manpage) straight up leads to file
conflicts with the uw-mailutils package, which already supplies both.
I'm specifically assigning this to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greetings, Asheesh (and others following this conversation),
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 11:25:41AM -0800, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
Shipping mailutil (and its manpage) straight up leads to file
conflicts with
12 matches
Mail list logo
