On Mon, 2010-09-13 at 18:24 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Patrick Ohly <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-09-10 at 23:01 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
> >> Any reason why there's not a source tar ball to go with the binary 
> >> releases?
> >
> > Ah, caught guilty. The only reason is that I didn't bother, because
> > anyone interested in source code at this point is better of pulling
> > directly from the "master" branches in the git repos.
> >
> > But now there's also a .tar.gz.
> 
> I maybe going blind as I still don't see one there.

http://downloads.syncevolution.org/syncevolution/sources/syncevolution-1.0.99.6.tar.gz

The ordering is a bit awkward. Perhaps I should move away the "alpha"
and "beta" releases into a sub-folder "archives" to align the
alphabetically sorted files with release order?


-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.


_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution

Reply via email to