Hi Oden,
2008/12/18 Oden Eriksson oeriks...@mandriva.com:
Den Monday 15 December 2008 09:25:33 skrev Arnaud Quette:
2008/12/14 Charles Lepple clep...@gmail.com:
All,
Hey there,
as a side note, this point is linked to the make package target in NUT
2.4.0
Arnaud and I were discussing
Den Monday 15 December 2008 09:25:33 skrev Arnaud Quette:
2008/12/14 Charles Lepple clep...@gmail.com:
All,
Hey there,
as a side note, this point is linked to the make package target in NUT
2.4.0
Arnaud and I were discussing the *.spec files we have in the NUT
source tree, and with
Den Thursday 18 December 2008 13:21:05 skrev Arnaud Quette:
Hi Oden,
2008/12/18 Oden Eriksson oeriks...@mandriva.com:
Den Monday 15 December 2008 09:25:33 skrev Arnaud Quette:
2008/12/14 Charles Lepple clep...@gmail.com:
All,
Hey there,
as a side note, this point is linked to the
2008/12/18 Oden Eriksson oeriks...@mandriva.com:
Den Thursday 18 December 2008 13:21:05 skrev Arnaud Quette:
Hi Oden,
2008/12/18 Oden Eriksson oeriks...@mandriva.com:
Den Monday 15 December 2008 09:25:33 skrev Arnaud Quette:
2008/12/14 Charles Lepple clep...@gmail.com:
All,
Hey
2008/12/14 Charles Lepple clep...@gmail.com:
All,
Hey there,
as a side note, this point is linked to the make package target in NUT 2.4.0
Arnaud and I were discussing the *.spec files we have in the NUT
source tree, and with the 2.4.0 release of NUT just around the corner,
I would like to
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:36:22 -0500
Charles Lepple clep...@gmail.com wrote:
My question to the packagers: Would you prefer that we include a
README file with a link to your website where you keep information
about your NUT packages? Or is it worthwhile for us to pull in your
changes every so
Citeren Stanislav Brabec sbra...@suse.cz:
On the other hand, I'm hearing a number of don't do that replies, so
instead, what should we put into the SUSE-specific portion of our
documentation to point people to your SRPMS (as Arjen suggested in
another reply)?
I agree with that don't do that
Citeren Charles Lepple clep...@gmail.com:
Since we do not have many developers who use the *.spec files
(although Arjen keeps the openSUSE directory up-to-date), I am not
sure if we are doing the packagers a disservice by shipping old
package descriptions. We try to keep the version numbers
2008/12/15 Arjen de Korte nut+de...@de-korte.org:
Citeren Stanislav Brabec sbra...@suse.cz:
On the other hand, I'm hearing a number of don't do that replies, so
instead, what should we put into the SUSE-specific portion of our
documentation to point people to your SRPMS (as Arjen suggested in
2008/12/15 Arnaud Quette aquette@gmail.com:
2008/12/15 Arjen de Korte nut+de...@de-korte.org:
Citeren Stanislav Brabec sbra...@suse.cz:
On the other hand, I'm hearing a number of don't do that replies, so
instead, what should we put into the SUSE-specific portion of our
documentation to
Citeren Arnaud Quette aquette@gmail.com:
I'm not too much in favor of directing people to SRPM/websites in the
sources. This is something that is much too volatile so I think we'd
better keep this on the website (and make sure we update them
regularly). What we distribute should be static
Hi To
2008/12/15 Tomáš Smetana tsmet...@redhat.com:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:36:22 -0500
Charles Lepple clep...@gmail.com wrote:
My question to the packagers: Would you prefer that we include a
README file with a link to your website where you keep information
about your NUT packages? Or is
12 matches
Mail list logo
