Curt, WE7U wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Ray Wells wrote:
After much drama I finally found a deb package for Graphicsmagick and it
appears to be working - gm display brings up the logo.
However, when I run configure for xastir (1.8.5) it complains it can't
find GraphicsMagick-configure, and
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 02:05:08PM -0500, we recorded a bogon-computron
collision of the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> flavor, containing:
> Tom Russo wrote:
> >
> >To be honest, I don't give a rip about the convention at all, but have a
> >bit of an attachment to major-release bumps being significant chan
Tom Russo wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 09:19:27AM -0500, we recorded a bogon-computron collision of
the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> flavor, containing:
v1.9.0 (APX190). So we're off on even/odd numbers. You're going for a
stable release, right? Stables, in my book, are not even numbers.
How many
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:12:25AM -0700, we recorded a bogon-computron
collision of the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> flavor, containing:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Tom Russo wrote:
>
> > > In other words go to 1.10 instead of 2.0, and make the next devel
> > > version be 1.11?
> >
> > No, I was thinking more
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Tom Russo wrote:
> > In other words go to 1.10 instead of 2.0, and make the next devel
> > version be 1.11?
>
> No, I was thinking more like the next stable release would be 1.9.0 and
> the next devel snapshot would be 1.9.1, etc.
Which makes us non-compliant with the Release
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 09:19:27AM -0500, we recorded a bogon-computron
collision of the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> flavor, containing:
> v1.9.0 (APX190). So we're off on even/odd numbers. You're going for a
> stable release, right? Stables, in my book, are not even numbers.
How many conventions do
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 06:46:36AM -0700, we recorded a bogon-computron
collision of the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> flavor, containing:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Jeremy Utley wrote:
>
> > As a non-developer I would agree with this as well. Major changes
> > usually involve changes in the ABI/API that make
v1.9.0 (APX190). So we're off on even/odd numbers. You're going for a
stable release, right? Stables, in my book, are not even numbers.
gerry
Curt, WE7U wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Jeremy Utley wrote:
As a non-developer I would agree with this as well. Major changes
usually involve chang
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Steve Huston wrote:
> Sheesh, Curt of all people you shouldn't be thinking so decimally.
>
> APX1A0
> APX1B0 ...
>
> So you've got until 1.16.0 to worry. :P
Hey, I started out without any assembler, compiler, whatever. I can
easily work in binary or hex. Or octal if I have
On 03/29/2007 09:46 AM, Curt, WE7U wrote:
> This might muck with the TOCALL a bit. Right now we're sending
> APX185. We'd need to send APX110 which would appear to be going
> backwards in our revisions.
Sheesh, Curt of all people you shouldn't be thinking so decimally.
APX1A0
APX1B0 ...
So y
On Mar 29, 2007, at 8:46 AM, Curt, WE7U wrote:
This might muck with the TOCALL a bit. Right now we're sending
APX185. We'd need to send APX110 which would appear to be going
backwards in our revisions.
do it in hex?
APX1A0
-Jason
kg4wsv
___
Xas
On Mar 29, 2007, at 09:46, Curt, WE7U wrote:
In other words go to 1.10 instead of 2.0, and make the next devel
version be 1.11?
This might muck with the TOCALL a bit. Right now we're sending
APX185. We'd need to send APX110 which would appear to be going
backwards in our revisions.
Go
On Mar 28, 2007, at 10:44, Curt, WE7U wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Chip G. wrote:
Things had been going well, but recently I've started having
periodic lockups. The symptoms are that I will come along and
check the machine and find that it Xastir is frozen.
What version of Xastir?
The ab
Are you going to fork the development tree and maintain the 1.10 version as
stable with patches?
If not, then I'd just go with 1.9.0 for the stable and 1.9.1 for the
development.
Not sure what I would suggest for the next stable release; maybe it's time to
let 1.9 sit and begin real work on 2.0
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Jeremy Utley wrote:
> As a non-developer I would agree with this as well. Major changes
> usually involve changes in the ABI/API that makes things incompatible
> with the previous release, or large changes in the code base that
> almost makes it an entirely new application.
15 matches
Mail list logo