On Sunday 15 June 2008, Phil Dibowitz wrote: > I think you missed the point. It wasn't the 8.x that was the problem. It > was assigning a version number.
Well, advocacy was never my business - but I'm getting it.. OK then, I'll keep my hands off any number that does not go into some computation, and let Stephen do his maintainer job. > This is fantastic! We have (as I'm sure you've seen), lots of Windows > users very stuck on the build process. As with everything else though, > I'd prefer to see this in the form of a patch - both for the sln/windows > build files and for the READMEs. Well, in the first place it's been a whole new file for me, that just happened to have the words 'INSTALL' and 'windows' in its name... And I must admit that, due to some problems with the different line terminators apparently, I so far failed to get a usable patch file for the windows build files that wasn't 100% old out and 100% new in. > Sounds great! I'm really excited about this effort. Unfortunately I > still haven't had a chance to review it at all. My apologies for that, > but spare time for me is still probably another 2 weeks out. I haven't > forgotten though - it's at the top of my TODO-when-I-have-2-moments-free > list. You're welcome - whenever you're ready, you're ready.. Andreas ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ concordance-devel mailing list concordance-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/concordance-devel
