On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Matt Hardwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi There,
>
> I am developing a module for another web application, and was
> wondering in peoples experience, what recent SVN version was the most
> stable?
By definition, the 1.4 branch *is* stable. The 1.5 branch is no
Matt Hardwick wrote:
> Hi There,
>
> I am developing a module for another web application, and was
> wondering in peoples experience, what recent SVN version was the most
> stable?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Matt. :)
>
I think they get better each time... I running the latest without any probl
Hi There,
I am developing a module for another web application, and was
wondering in peoples experience, what recent SVN version was the most
stable?
Thanks in advance.
Matt. :)
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Mobli
Paul Lesniewski wrote:
>
> Looks like it's time to put those constants where they belong. You
> can download the next SVN update or apply these two patches:
Paul,
Just a follow-up to let you know that I pulled in svn revision 13269
this
morning and the notice is fixed. Excellent. Than
Ralf Dreger wrote:
>> It's not a "parameter". You don't "modify" it. Your problem is NOT
>> SquirrelMail. As I already told you, this is added by your MTA. You
>> need to find out WHY the messages are being rejected from your
>> provider. What you claimed previously is obviously wrong.
>
> I
David C. Rankin schrieb:
> Paul Lesniewski wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 11:19 PM, David C. Rankin
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Paul Lesniewski wrote:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 10:45 PM, David C. Rankin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
*snip*
> But, I have one more for you. Just
