On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 01:29:13PM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 February 2008 12:22:40 Alessandro Zummo wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:59:15 +0100
> > Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > in general I have no objections about moving forward, but
> > > has the branch
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 13:56:47 Sergey Vlasov wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 01:29:13PM +0100, Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> > On Tuesday 19 February 2008 12:22:40 Alessandro Zummo wrote:
> > > On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:59:15 +0100
> > > Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > in g
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 12:22:40 Alessandro Zummo wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:59:15 +0100
> Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > in general I have no objections about moving forward, but
> > has the branch in CVS been done?
> >
> > What I'd like to see is at least having the 1.0.x b
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:59:15 +0100
Gerhard Jaeger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in general I have no objections about moving forward, but
> has the branch in CVS been done?
>
> What I'd like to see is at least having the 1.0.x branch
> for maintainance and proceeding with head for the 1.1.x
> series (no ma
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 11:37:06 Alessandro Zummo wrote:
> Date: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 @ 10:37:06
> Author: azummo-guest
> Path: /cvsroot/sane/sane-backends
>
> Modified: configure configure.in include/sane/sane.h
>
> configure, configure.in, include/sanei.h: bumped version
> n
