Re: [Evolution] gtkhtml 1.0??

2001-12-04 Thread Ettore Perazzoli
So, if I want the latest and greatest (including 1.0+), do I stick with the HEAD? IOW, will 1.0 changes be brought back into HEAD eventually, and will the new features occur in HEAD, or have the 1.0+ streams already been branched and HEAD is dead? You should never assume that the

Re: [Evolution] gtkhtml 1.0??

2001-12-03 Thread Not Zed
On Sat, 2001-12-01 at 06:25, Rodrigo Moya wrote: On Fri, 2001-11-30 at 19:48, Lonnie Borntreger wrote: Here's a bunch of (probably) stupid questions. Any particular reason it was branched? Just curious since I though the normal way was to remain in one branch until 1.0 then branch new

Re: [Evolution] gtkhtml 1.0??

2001-11-30 Thread Lonnie Borntreger
Here's a bunch of (probably) stupid questions. Any particular reason it was branched? Just curious since I though the normal way was to remain in one branch until 1.0 then branch new development. So, to continue my ways of having the latest stuff from CVS, should I change the GAL and Evolution

Re: [Evolution] gtkhtml 1.0??

2001-11-30 Thread Larry Ewing
1.0 is on the gtkhtml-1-0-branch --Larry On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 22:37, Dan Hensley wrote: A few days ago I updated the Evolution 1 branch from CVS, and it's looking for gtkhtml 1.0. However, gtkhtml hasn't updated for a few days, and it's still at 0.16.1. Is it just that anoncvs hasn't

[Evolution] gtkhtml 1.0??

2001-11-29 Thread Dan Hensley
A few days ago I updated the Evolution 1 branch from CVS, and it's looking for gtkhtml 1.0. However, gtkhtml hasn't updated for a few days, and it's still at 0.16.1. Is it just that anoncvs hasn't caught up yet, or is there some disconnect? Dan