On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Peter Robinson wrote:
Well, if we decide that future releases of Sugar should run ok on the
next major release of CentOS, we cannot depend on later versions of
python, gtk, etc.
I'm not sure something like sugar which is (and should be) fast moving
mixes well with
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 19:25, Bernie Innocenti ber...@codewiz.org wrote:
[cc += mstone]
[cc -= everyone else]
El Mon, 21-09-2009 a las 12:54 -0400, Bill Bogstad escribió:
I agree with your statement about security updates being what is
desired here However, you can have bugs elsewhere
in
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 19:25, Bernie Innocenti ber...@codewiz.org wrote:
[cc += mstone]
[cc -= everyone else]
El Mon, 21-09-2009 a las 12:54 -0400, Bill Bogstad escribió:
I agree with your statement about security
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure something like sugar which is (and should be) fast moving
mixes well with something like CentOS or its parent. At the beginning
of the v6 release cycle begins it will be fine but within 12 months
I'm sure
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 9:53 PM, Bill Bogstad bogs...@pobox.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure something like sugar which is (and should be) fast moving
mixes well with something like CentOS or its parent. At the beginning
of the
[trimmed some cc's - they are probably on these lists anyway]
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
Well it wasn't a royal pain if you didn't have to co-ordinate between
about 8 different parties. And most of the the latest releases were
in fact defined
6 matches
Mail list logo
