On Tuesday 29 September 2009 16:05:38 Matt Williams wrote:
> 2009/9/29 Alexander Neundorf :
> > On Tuesday 29 September 2009, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Alexander Neundorf
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I guess we will with it, because I don't really see a difference
On 29.09.09 21:20:02, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Alexander Neundorf
> wrote:
>
> > I guess we will with it, because I don't really see a difference between
> > source compatibility for C++ files and for CMake files. In both cases, if
> > it's broken, the package
2009/9/29 Alexander Neundorf :
> On Tuesday 29 September 2009, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Alexander Neundorf
>>
>> wrote:
>> > I guess we will with it, because I don't really see a difference between
>> > source compatibility for C++ files and for CMake files. I
On Tuesday 29 September 2009, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Alexander Neundorf
>
> wrote:
> > I guess we will with it, because I don't really see a difference between
> > source compatibility for C++ files and for CMake files. In both cases, if
> > it's broken, the
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Alexander Neundorf
wrote:
> I guess we will with it, because I don't really see a difference between
> source compatibility for C++ files and for CMake files. In both cases, if
> it's broken, the package will not compile.
Do we promise source compatibility for C+
On Tuesday 29 September 2009, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 29.09.09 19:24:54, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
...
> > Doesn't that imply that we will always need the 2.4.x behaviour for all
> > of KDE 4.x ?
> > I mean, if I set some property to NEW, which may change some behaviour,
> > the developer may h
On 29.09.09 19:24:54, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 September 2009, Bill Hoffman wrote:
> > David Cole wrote:
> > > Thanks for the info, I'll fix the project later. I believe however
> > > that I
> > > didn't see any warnings, which should now be posted if I understood
> > >
On Tuesday 29 September 2009, Bill Hoffman wrote:
> David Cole wrote:
> > Thanks for the info, I'll fix the project later. I believe however
> > that I
> > didn't see any warnings, which should now be posted if I understood
> > correctly? Or is that part of the OLD behaviour still w
On Tuesday 29 September 2009, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> to ensure that example code showing how to use a library is up-to-date
> (and/or the installed headers/libs are okay) I would like to have that code
> automatically test-compiled directly after an installation of the
> headers/
Em Segunda-feira 28 de setembro 2009, às 05:12:15, você escreveu:
> On 28.09.09 00:05:35, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Bill Hoffman
wrote:
> > > I am happy to announce that CMake 2.8.0 has entered the beta stage! You
> > > can find the source and binaries here:
On 29.09.09 09:26:30, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 28.09.09 16:08:22, Brad King wrote:
> > Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > > On 25.09.09 16:07:21, Bill Hoffman wrote:
> > >> I am happy to announce that CMake 2.8.0 has entered the beta stage! You
> > >> can find the source and binaries here: http://www.cm
David Cole wrote:
> Thanks for the info, I'll fix the project later. I believe however
> that I
> didn't see any warnings, which should now be posted if I understood
> correctly? Or is that part of the OLD behaviour still working?
>
>
> If you set the policty to OLD, you should j
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:26 AM, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 28.09.09 16:08:22, Brad King wrote:
> > Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > > On 25.09.09 16:07:21, Bill Hoffman wrote:
> > >> I am happy to announce that CMake 2.8.0 has entered the beta stage!
> You
> > >> can find the source and binaries here
On 28.09.09 16:08:22, Brad King wrote:
> Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > On 25.09.09 16:07:21, Bill Hoffman wrote:
> >> I am happy to announce that CMake 2.8.0 has entered the beta stage! You
> >> can find the source and binaries here: http://www.cmake.org/files/v2.8/.
> >>
> >> I am sure I am leaving s
14 matches
Mail list logo