On Friday 13 February 2009, Freddy Vulto wrote:
David Paleino d.paleino at gmail.com writes:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:11:41 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Wednesday 04 February 2009, David Paleino wrote:
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:59:25 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
I'd insert the
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:14:29 + (UTC), Freddy Vulto wrote:
[..] maybe we'd better release bash_completion-2 (or ..200902xx) [..]
I was starting a branch for the release process... what version number you
believe is sane?
I'd start at 1.0, (so as not to be necessarily linked to the bash
David Paleino d.paleino at gmail.com writes:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:14:29 + (UTC), Freddy Vulto wrote:
[..] maybe we'd better release bash_completion-2 (or ..200902xx) [..]
I was starting a branch for the release process... what version number you
believe is sane?
I'd start at
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 11:25:08 + (UTC), Freddy Vulto wrote:
David Paleino d.paleino at gmail.com writes:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:14:29 + (UTC), Freddy Vulto wrote:
[..] maybe we'd better release bash_completion-2 (or ..200902xx) [..]
I was starting a branch for the release
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:58:46 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
I think it would be good to set Reply-To to bash-completion-devel for all
messages on the -commits list. This is based on the assumption that
discussion about commits should take place on -devel, not -commits (I'm not
sure if people
