* Adam Borowski [120119 02:29]:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 03:47:11PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > There is a lot of different opinions about wether the format is sane at
> > all. A problem with the basic idea/design of 3.0 (git) as opposed to the
> > maturity of the implementation.
>
> I
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 03:47:11PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> "Thijs Kinkhorst" writes:
> > On Mon, January 16, 2012 23:26, Paul Wise wrote:
> >>> I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until
> >>> now.
> >>
> >> It is not currently accepted by the Debian archive
"Thijs Kinkhorst" writes:
> On Mon, January 16, 2012 23:26, Paul Wise wrote:
>>> I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until
>>> now.
>>
>> It is not currently accepted by the Debian archive:
>>
>> http://bugs.debian.org/642801
>
> My experience until now is that it's ma
On Mon, January 16, 2012 23:26, Paul Wise wrote:
>> I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until
>> now.
>
> It is not currently accepted by the Debian archive:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/642801
My experience until now is that it's mature in dpkg. It does the job just
like
2012/1/17 Björn Esser:
> I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until now.
It is not currently accepted by the Debian archive:
http://bugs.debian.org/642801
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi there!
I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until now.
BR,
Björn.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iF4EAREIAAYFAk8Une4AC
6 matches
Mail list logo