On 30 Mar 2002, Christian Leutloff wrote:
> both sounds good for me. I'm one of the "(mostly not responsively)
> maintainer" Andreas mentioned.
To be exact I did not had you in my mind when I wrote about those
maintainers because you declared your time constraints.
> Therefor I've orphaned all my
"Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The first is about debconf use: last time i sent you a similar mail about this
> The second issue is abuot the zope restart for each zope modules installed:
both sounds good for me. I'm one of the "(mostly not responsively)
maintaine
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> If all works well, I might have a working prototype of this NG Zope
> packages at the end of the next week.
Great!
> I would appreciate comments regarding this redesign.
Sounds very good from your description.
> A remaining problem are .zexp products
* Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020326 01:27]:
> The second issue is abuot the zope restart for each zope modules installed:
> refer to bug #134516.
> I think that we can do something better using apt.conf option. [1]
> My idea is that the prompt should be:
>
> Would you like
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> I'd appreciate any opinion, hint and so on.
I really like your idea of a centralized organisation of a debconf
template for all zope modules and I would support this.
Unfortunately the reality is that I guess half of the debconf-ized
Zo
Hi all,
I'd like to discuss with you two issues regarding zope modules packages.
The first is about debconf use: last time i sent you a similar mail about this
issues i lost all replys, so i do not really know your position about this.
I'd like to encourage all of you to use debconf to prompt the
6 matches
Mail list logo
