Re: [Bug-gnubg] Source tarballs on gnubg.org

2008-01-03 Thread Achim Mueller
Hi folks, a Happy New Year to all of you ... * Christian Anthon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080102 20:46]: There is no reason to keep more than a few tarballs in my opinion. People with very specific needs are better of using cvs anyway. I didn't follow the list for a while, also I didn't take care of

Re: [Bug-gnubg] Source tarballs on gnubg.org

2008-01-02 Thread Jonathan Kinsey
Massimiliano Maini wrote: Hi all, at the address http://www.gnubg.org/media/sources/ you will see that some tarballs are empty/broken: 20071128-20071204, 20080101 : size is 0 20071220, 20071231 and 20080101: size is smaller than expected

Re: [Bug-gnubg] Source tarballs on gnubg.org

2008-01-02 Thread Massimiliano Maini
Jonathan Kinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 02/01/2008 12:42:16: Massimiliano Maini wrote: Hi all, at the address http://www.gnubg.org/media/sources/ you will see that some tarballs are empty/broken: 20071128-20071204, 20080101 : size is 0 20071220,