Michael Nelson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 5:17 AM, Tim Penhey wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:59:45 Michael Hudson wrote:
>>> Tim Penhey wrote:
Hi guys,
>
> Hi Tim and Michael, thanks for taking the time to update the mockups
> with your thoughts etc.!
>
> I'd really like to be
On Monday 15 February 2010 03:59:45 Michael Hudson wrote:
> Yeah. It feels like we're verging on analysis paralysis now.
I don't think this is the case at all.
I've seen a very active exchange of suggestions and ideas between quite a few
people, and we've uncovered quite a few issues and bad as
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:23:42 +1300, Tim Penhey wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I've been spending more time looking at this, and I want to make sure we
> start
> getting some traction on the UI to build.
Hi Tim,
I'm keen to get moving as well, however, I don't want to dive in and
start down a path that
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 5:17 AM, Tim Penhey wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:59:45 Michael Hudson wrote:
>> Tim Penhey wrote:
>> > Hi guys,
>> >
Hi Tim and Michael, thanks for taking the time to update the mockups
with your thoughts etc.!
I'd really like to be able to call about these - some of t
Tim Penhey wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:59:45 Michael Hudson wrote:
>> Tim Penhey wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I've been spending more time looking at this, and I want to make sure we
>>> start getting some traction on the UI to build.
>>>
>>> I'm not yet convinced that showing existing recipes i
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:59:45 Michael Hudson wrote:
> Tim Penhey wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I've been spending more time looking at this, and I want to make sure we
> > start getting some traction on the UI to build.
> >
> > I'm not yet convinced that showing existing recipes is useful at this
> >
Tim Penhey wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I've been spending more time looking at this, and I want to make sure we
> start
> getting some traction on the UI to build.
>
> I'm not yet convinced that showing existing recipes is useful at this stage.
> We aren't yet clear ourselves why we'd want to do th
On Mon, 2010-02-15 at 16:23 +1300, Tim Penhey wrote:
>
> I'm also wondering where the {debupstream} bit comes from. From
> something in
> the deb directory I'm guessing.
$ head debian/changelog
take the bit up to the last - :)
or dpkg-parsechangelog -c 1
-Rob
signature.asc
Description:
8 matches
Mail list logo