On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 07:36:36PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 12:19:04PM +0200, Bas Wijnen a écrit :
> > But that's not what he wants, because then all the people who upgrade to
> > etch
> > with also see it then, even though it's irrelevant for them. What he's
> > as
Le Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 12:19:04PM +0200, Bas Wijnen a écrit :
>
> But that's not what he wants, because then all the people who upgrade to etch
> with also see it then, even though it's irrelevant for them. What he's asking
> is if there's a way to show it only if the upgrade is from a high enou
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:14:36AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 09:33:46AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > OK, thanks all for your answers. I will mention the problem in the
> > README. How can I give a message only to the users who upgrade from the
> > previous version?
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 09:33:46AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 08:20:15PM -0300, Leo Antunes a écrit :
> > If that's done then you're job's simple, repackage with the new version
> > and that's it. Make it as fast as possible though, since your users are
> > probably a bi
Le Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 08:20:15PM -0300, Leo Antunes a écrit :
> If that's done then you're job's simple, repackage with the new version
> and that's it. Make it as fast as possible though, since your users are
> probably a bit confused by now... and if upstream takes a while to
> release official
On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 06:26 +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> What's upstream doing about it now? Are they releasing a 2.0.1 or 2.1 or 3
> or something to replace that one, or are they just sticking with the V2
> package? Again, what are upstream's plans? That will have a massive
> bearing on what
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 05:09:51PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 04:28:14PM +1000, Matthew Palmer a écrit :
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 02:44:14PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > > For one of the packages I created, the upstream sources I used were a
> > > version 1.x acci
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 02:44:14PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> For one of the packages I created, the upstream sources I used were a
> version 1.x accidentally released as version 2.0 on sourceforge.
"Accidentally"? Did you package and upload this new upstream release? Has
upstream gone back
Le Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 04:28:14PM +1000, Matthew Palmer a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 02:44:14PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > For one of the packages I created, the upstream sources I used were a
> > version 1.x accidentally released as version 2.0 on sourceforge.
>
> "Accidentally"?
W
Dear mentors,
For one of the packages I created, the upstream sources I used were a
version 1.x accidentally released as version 2.0 on sourceforge. The
differences between the two versions are quite high, as the file formats
accepted in input have changed (some added, some removed).
I am wonderi
10 matches
Mail list logo
