On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 01:14:39AM -0500, Simo Leone wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 02:04:13AM -0400, Loui wrote:
> >
> > What? Where's the test site?
> >
> http://aur.neotuli.net
Oh right. I remember that one now.
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 07:54:24AM +0200, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Angel_Vel=E1squez_
wrote:
> Hi, I am writing this e-mail after reviewing the AUR code and some patches
> that people have been sending.
>
> As we know, AUR (like many applications) is still in development, and many
> of the things that are
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 02:04:13AM -0400, Loui wrote:
>
> What? Where's the test site?
>
http://aur.neotuli.net
pgpHHfsdL9EQ8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 12:46:48AM -0500, Simo Leone wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 01:25:20AM -0400, Loui wrote:
> > Hey guys. I'm thinking we should just merge testing into master now.
> > We can test master for a little bit and if it seems like there are no
> > regressions push the new code in
Hi, I am writing this e-mail after reviewing the AUR code and some patches
that people have been sending.
As we know, AUR (like many applications) is still in development, and many
of the things that are actually working weren't coded by any of us, and I
can understand this.
The purpose of my e-m
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 01:25:20AM -0400, Loui wrote:
> Hey guys. I'm thinking we should just merge testing into master now.
> We can test master for a little bit and if it seems like there are no
> regressions push the new code into the running server.
>
> I'm bringing this up because someone has
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 12:54:29AM +0800, Callan Barrett wrote:
> Here's another iteration of this patch, I'm still looking for as much
> input as possible but this is basically what I would push to testing
> at this point. The script now outputs in a different format to be
> parsed and there is so
Hey guys. I'm thinking we should just merge testing into master now.
We can test master for a little bit and if it seems like there are no
regressions push the new code into the running server.
I'm bringing this up because someone has submitted a duplicate of what
has been dubbed "The most annoyin
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 11:22:08PM +0800, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
> Sometimes fitting within 80 characters is a bit hard (I'm not talking
> about scenarios with 4 nested loops - eww), in which case 90 or even 100
> characters would be more acceptable than breaking it up in some hideous
> way.
Here's another iteration of this patch, I'm still looking for as much
input as possible but this is basically what I would push to testing
at this point. The script now outputs in a different format to be
parsed and there is some cleanup done in pkgsubmit.php to get it
working more cleanly with the
10 matches
Mail list logo
