On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 17:31:44 -0400, Sebastien Roy
wrote:
> On 04/30/10 04:04 PM, Albert Lee wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:34:19 -0400, Sebastien Roy
>> wrote:
>>> On 04/30/10 03:29 PM, Sebastien Roy wrote:
A couple of minor questions:
The spec file syntax is also conceptually a
> Where possible, we will coordinate with those components that are
> shipped as part of the official GNOME community release. Solaris
> Desktop may deviate from the GNOME community release, but only
where
> there is an appropriate business justification or engineeri
On 04/30/10 04:04 PM, Albert Lee wrote:
On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:34:19 -0400, Sebastien Roy
wrote:
On 04/30/10 03:29 PM, Sebastien Roy wrote:
A couple of minor questions:
The spec file syntax is also conceptually an exported interface, and it
needs a stability level. It would be nice if the sp
On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:34:19 -0400, Sebastien Roy
wrote:
> On 04/30/10 03:29 PM, Sebastien Roy wrote:
>> A couple of minor questions:
>>
>> The spec file syntax is also conceptually an exported interface, and it
>> needs a stability level. It would be nice if the spec file syntax were
>> part of t
On 04/30/10 03:29 PM, Sebastien Roy wrote:
A couple of minor questions:
The spec file syntax is also conceptually an exported interface, and it
needs a stability level. It would be nice if the spec file syntax were
part of the materials (I'm guessing it's documented somewhere anyway).
How will
A couple of minor questions:
The spec file syntax is also conceptually an exported interface, and it
needs a stability level. It would be nice if the spec file syntax were
part of the materials (I'm guessing it's documented somewhere anyway).
How will the tools handle a hypothetical syntacti
