On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 13:28 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:00 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > I hope that eventually, we might be permitted to use the "real" > > gnome-2-32 branch in GNOME git for this, rather than having to do it > > elsewhere. If that branch is a "dead end" and would otherwise be unused, > > then there's no harm in letting us use it as a more central location for > > our collaboration, surely? > > I'm fine with you using the "real" gnome-2-32 branch. Would even be > nice to see another formal 2.32 release if enough patches accumulate.
That's great; thanks. I'll do a little more testing on the patches I've cherry-picked into my trees, and then unless someone else has objected in the meantime I'll push them. > Per GNOME's six-month release cycle, upstream maintainers have pretty > much wrapped up 3.0 and are now focused on 3.1. Although presumably there will be 3.01 and 3.02 releases so those branches aren't *quite* as orphaned as 2.32 yet :) -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre david.woodho...@intel.com Intel Corporation _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers mailing list evolution-hackers@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
