-- Forwarded message --
From: Tony Anderson <tony_ander...@usa.net>
Date: Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 12:12 AM
Subject: Fwd: [Pkg-sugar-devel] sugar is marked for autoremoval from testing
To: Walter Bender <wal...@sugarlabs.org>, Martin Abente Lahaye <
martin.abente.lah...@
Quoting Tony Anderson (2016-06-24 13:13:57)
> I subscribed to the list because there seemed to be a lot of sugar
> activity.
I appreciate your interest.
> I have been dismayed by the frequent threats to drop Sugar or a
> critical component. At one point, the messages suggested that the
>
Thanks for the reply.
I subscribed to the list because there seemed to be a lot of sugar
activity. I have been dismayed by the
frequent threats to drop Sugar or a critical component. At one point,
the messages suggested that the
automated testing scripts could not even read the license text at
Hi Tony!
First of all: Thanks for your interest in Debian packaging of Sugar!
Quoting Tony Anderson (2016-06-24 08:25:07)
> Does anyone know what this is all about? How has Debian packaged Sugar
> in one package?
> What is the difference, if any, between 0.106 as released and 0.106.1-1?
> Does
Does anyone know what this is all about? How has Debian packaged Sugar
in one package?
What is the difference, if any, between 0.106 as released and 0.106.1-1?
Does this one package
include the essential activities? Does it include both sugar and sugar3?
What is an RC bug?
Tony
Does anyone know what this is all about? How has Debian packaged Sugar
in one package?
What is the difference, if any, between 0.106 as released and 0.106.1-1?
Does this one package
include the essential activities? Does it include both sugar and sugar3?
Tony
Forwarded Message
6 matches
Mail list logo
