Ok, I've made the changes. And I'll move the nightlies once the
manual run is complete.
--
James Mitchell
678.910.8017
On Aug 7, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 8/7/06, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are we still going to use the nightly build location [0] for host
On 8/7/06, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are we still going to use the nightly build location [0] for hosting
the test builds? I'm wondering because I think the current layout is
confusing with '1.3.x' and '1.3.5' listed in the same directory.
...
If we want to keep these here, ca
Are we still going to use the nightly build location [0] for hosting
the test builds? I'm wondering because I think the current layout is
confusing with '1.3.x' and '1.3.5' listed in the same directory.
If we want to keep these here, can we inject another directory?
Besides making my cron
On 8/2/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/2/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's true, but looking over my schedule, I have no discretionary
> time left until the 20th. If someone wants to rebuild the release from
> the 1.3.5 tag and move it out, that would be great.
On 8/2/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's true, but looking over my schedule, I have no discretionary
time left until the 20th. If someone wants to rebuild the release from
the 1.3.5 tag and move it out, that would be great.
I'll try to do it Thursday night, but most likely it wi
\On 8/2/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You got me there, Martin :-) It didn't make sense. hehe I do believe the
remaining issues
can be solved.
No time like the present. The 1.3.5 build is tagged, and the
repository is open to commits.
But that will be a 1.3.6, right?
Well,
On 8/1/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It isn't on the mirrors yet, and hasn't been announced, so the website
hasn't been updated. I think only the signatures remain to be done,
then everything can be deployed to the mirrored directories.
That's true, but looking over my schedule, I
You got me there, Martin :-) It didn't make sense. hehe I do believe the
remaining issues can be solved. But that will be a 1.3.6, right? It's easy for
feature creep to enter into the picture -- so my unclear point (hehe) was that
if I deliver some moderate changes, it makes getting a production
On 8/1/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If 1.3.5 is officialy beta and uploaded to mirrors, doesn't it make sense to then publish
it on the website sidebar simply with a "(beta)" postfix?
It isn't on the mirrors yet, and hasn't been announced, so the website
hasn't been updated.
On 8/1/06, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If 1.3.5 is officialy beta and uploaded to mirrors, doesn't it make sense
to then publish it on the website sidebar simply with a "(beta)" postfix?
Also if 1.3.5 does not go production, I don't think 1.3 ever will.
Why? You don't believe th
If 1.3.5 is officialy beta and uploaded to mirrors, doesn't it make sense to
then publish it on the website sidebar simply with a "(beta)" postfix?
Also if 1.3.5 does not go production, I don't think 1.3 ever will. I am going
to deliver my localization stuff soon, and so that will increase the c
11 matches
Mail list logo
