Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Hi!
>
> First of all, thanks for the fast response, clearly appreciated.
> Sometimes I wish some of my upstreams would be as responsive as this
> "downstream". ;)
>
> * Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-23 19:12:49 CEST]:
>> At one point in the p
* Sarah Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-24 14:12:39 CEST]:
> Sheesh. Was just a suggestion. It wasn't a "You must do this, or
> else". No need to start getting antagonistic at me.
Sheesh, sorry for have you hit on your wrong foot. It wasn't a "I deny
to do so", so no need to get pouting at
2007/10/24, Gerfried Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> And do you know about that from my part having to go look there
> for every single package every once in a while to see if there is
> something new is a quite broken approach
Long term in my opinion this looks indeed broken to me, but not the
fact
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Yes. And do you know about that from my part having to go look there
> for every single package every once in a while to see if there is
> something new is a quite broken approach, when having some amount of
> packages, especia
* Sarah Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-24 13:46:27 CEST]:
> > This thing propably won't need to get fixed for wesnoth because I plan
> > to introduce the wesnoth-all package in Debian too, suggested by
> > upstream (never heard anything about it from any MOTU that this patch is
> > hanging in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> This thing propably won't need to get fixed for wesnoth because I plan
> to introduce the wesnoth-all package in Debian too, suggested by
> upstream (never heard anything about it from any MOTU that this patch is
> hanging in there, though, which I
Hi!
First of all, thanks for the fast response, clearly appreciated.
Sometimes I wish some of my upstreams would be as responsive as this
"downstream". ;)
* Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-23 19:12:49 CEST]:
> At one point in the past, libsdl-*1.2-dev packages didn't
Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Hi!
>
> [going as Bcc to the MOTUs which are listed in the changelog of wesnoth
> explicitly]
>
> I just recently gone through the MOTU patches of wesnoth again, and
> noticed one thing that looks pretty strange to me and one thing that is
> just wrong and should
Hi!
[going as Bcc to the MOTUs which are listed in the changelog of wesnoth
explicitly]
I just recently gone through the MOTU patches of wesnoth again, and
noticed one thing that looks pretty strange to me and one thing that is
just wrong and should get checked for other packages, too.
