Matthias Schwarzottz...@gentoo.org schrieb am 28.06.2009 um 21:55:
On Samstag, 27. Juni 2009, Udo Richter wrote:
On 25.06.2009 21:55, Ville Skyttä wrote:
Hmmm, this could also be a great opportunity: Why not nominate someone
as the official maintainer of the 1.6 stable branch? Someone who
Well, I am not keen on doing this, but to get some progress I at least did
upload my git tree based on vdr-1.6.0-2 version of
git://vdr.gekrumbel.de/vdr.git to github:
http://github.com/zzam/vdr/tree/stable
git://github.com/zzam/vdr.git
Branch stable
It contains up to now only my
Hi Joachim,
Am 29.06.2009 09:49, schrieb J.W.:
Well, I am not keen on doing this, but to get some progress I at least did
upload my git tree based on vdr-1.6.0-2 version of
git://vdr.gekrumbel.de/vdr.git to github:
http://github.com/zzam/vdr/tree/stable
git://github.com/zzam/vdr.git
Branch
Jan Williesj...@willies.info schrieb am 29.06.2009 um 09:52:
Hi Joachim,
Am 29.06.2009 09:49, schrieb J.W.:
Well, I am not keen on doing this, but to get some progress I at least did
upload my git tree based on vdr-1.6.0-2 version of
git://vdr.gekrumbel.de/vdr.git to github:
On Samstag, 27. Juni 2009, Udo Richter wrote:
On 25.06.2009 21:55, Ville Skyttä wrote:
Hmmm, this could also be a great opportunity: Why not nominate someone
as the official maintainer of the 1.6 stable branch? Someone who
collects or back-ports fixes and smaller enhancements to the 1.6
On 25.06.2009 21:55, Ville Skyttä wrote:
Hmmm, this could also be a great opportunity: Why not nominate someone
as the official maintainer of the 1.6 stable branch? Someone who
collects or back-ports fixes and smaller enhancements to the 1.6 branch,
and does minor releases based on community
On Sunday 21 June 2009, Udo Richter wrote:
On 21.06.2009 17:08, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
On 17.06.2009 19:03, J.W. wrote:
I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have
already published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) . Are there more
bugfixes planed?
I
Am 25.06.2009 21:55, schrieb Ville Skyttä:
On Sunday 21 June 2009, Udo Richter wrote:
On 21.06.2009 17:08, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
On 17.06.2009 19:03, J.W. wrote:
I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have
already published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) .
On 17.06.2009 19:03, J.W. wrote:
I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have
already published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) . Are there more
bugfixes planed?
I released VDR 1.6.0 only because several people wanted to have
a stable release just before switching
On 21.06.2009 17:08, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
On 17.06.2009 19:03, J.W. wrote:
I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have
already published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) . Are there more
bugfixes planed?
I released VDR 1.6.0 only because several people
On 06/16/09 10:30, Joachim Welker wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I see you are very busy in developing the new vdr-1.7.* (thanks for your
great work !). But what about stable vdr-1.6.0? You released two patches
which should result in version vdr-1.6.1. AFAIR there were no complaints
about these patches, so
I thought you could just release vdr-1.6.1 with the patches you have already
published (maybe with additional dvb_api patch) . Are there more bugfixes
planed?
2009/6/17 Klaus Schmidinger klaus.schmidin...@cadsoft.de
On 06/16/09 10:30, Joachim Welker wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I see you are very busy
Hi Klaus,
I see you are very busy in developing the new vdr-1.7.* (thanks for your
great work !). But what about stable vdr-1.6.0? You released two patches
which should result in version vdr-1.6.1. AFAIR there were no complaints
about these patches, so I think it's save to release vdr-1.6.1 in
On Dienstag, 16. Juni 2009, Joachim Welker wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I see you are very busy in developing the new vdr-1.7.* (thanks for your
great work !). But what about stable vdr-1.6.0? You released two patches
which should result in version vdr-1.6.1. AFAIR there were no complaints
about these
On Dienstag, 16. Juni 2009, VDR User wrote:
The patch vdr-dvb-api-5-is-fine.diff is not a proper fix iirc.
Ok, so where is the problem, and how should a proper fix look like?
Regards
Matthias
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
15 matches
Mail list logo
