On 11 Oct 2012 Chris Newman wrote:
> In article <2348b5dc52@nails.abbeypress.net>,
>Jim Nagel wrote:
>
>> I suggest this simple textfile stating a "latest change" date because
>> it's tedious to go through the process of merging !Boot and !System on
>> three separate machines every ti
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:42:05AM +0100, Richard Porter wrote:
> Why not just take the additional resources out of the zip file
> altogether and either make them available separately or provide links
> to them elsewhere? Like Chris I only update !Boot and !System when I
> need to - if !NetSurf
On 11 Oct 2012 Rob Kendrick wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:42:05AM +0100, Richard Porter wrote:
>> Why not just take the additional resources out of the zip file
>> altogether and either make them available separately or provide links
>> to them elsewhere? Like Chris I only update !Boot and
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:58:37AM +0100, Richard Porter wrote:
> On 11 Oct 2012 Rob Kendrick wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:42:05AM +0100, Richard Porter wrote:
> >> Why not just take the additional resources out of the zip file
> >> altogether and either make them available separately
In article ,
Richard Porter wrote:
> Why not just take the additional resources out of the zip file
> altogether and either make them available separately or provide links
> to them elsewhere? Like Chris I only update !Boot and !System when I
> need to - if !NetSurf complains or if I'm noti
In article <2348b5dc52@nails.abbeypress.net>,
Jim Nagel wrote:
> I suggest this simple textfile stating a "latest change" date because
> it's tedious to go through the process of merging !Boot and !System on
> three separate machines every time a new test build of Netsurf is
> installed,
In article <52dcee7e6et...@netsurf-browser.org>,
Michael Drake wrote:
> > Why not just take the additional resources out of the zip file
> > altogether and either make them available separately or provide links
> > to them elsewhere? Like Chris I only update !Boot and !System when I
> > need
Michael Drake wrote on 11 Oct:
> We ship NetSurf with what it needs to run.
Rob Kendrick wrote on 11 Oct:
> we use the same build system and infrastructure to produce test
> builds as we do release builds.
Understood. But neither of these points prevent the inclusion of the
simple textfile I
In message
Jim Nagel wrote:
> Michael Drake wrote on 11 Oct:
>> We ship NetSurf with what it needs to run.
> Rob Kendrick wrote on 11 Oct:
>> we use the same build system and infrastructure to produce test
>> builds as we do release builds.
> Understood. But neither of these point
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:04:08PM +0100, Graham Pickles wrote:
> The above (textfile) seems to be a very straight forward and pragmatic
> request, easy to implement and would be of assistance to many of us
You know where to send patches :)
B.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012, at 02:04:08PM +0100, Graham Pickles wrote:
>> The above (textfile) seems to be a very straight forward and pragmatic
>> request, easy to implement and would be of assistance to many of us
An alternative approach (I have no idea of relative ease of
implementation) would be to
In article <890404dd52@nails.abbeypress.net>,
Jim Nagel wrote:
> An alternative approach (I have no idea of relative ease of
> implementation) would be to manually put real datestamps on the
> various modules etc once and for all, and on the outer shell of the
> !Boot and !System suppli
In message <52dcd13453cvj...@waitrose.com>
Chris Newman wrote:
> In article <2348b5dc52@nails.abbeypress.net>,
> Jim Nagel wrote:
>
>
>
> > I suggest this simple textfile stating a "latest change" date because
> > it's tedious to go through the process of merging !Boot and !Sy
13 matches
Mail list logo
