Andi Vajda wrote:
>> We wouldn't have the bug nor this discussion if we could do nothing. It
>> all started because the end-user release did not have all the same tests
>> and tools that you get with dev release or when you build chandler
>> yourself. QA and testers needs them. Parcel developers need them.
> 
> That is a worthwhile conversation to have but I thought you had
> suggested getting rid of the debug bits distribution. What you're
> suggesting above doesn't require us getting rid of the debug bits
> distribution.

I am not suggesting anything above. I am stating a fact.

But as a potential response to the need I suggested[1] getting rid of
dev release (and putting all dev tools into release), and it is one of
the items on the ballot[2,3].

[1] http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/dev/2005-November/004378.html
[2] http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/dev/2005-November/004423.html
[3] Describe 4a and 4b:
http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/dev/2005-November/004439.html

-- 
  Heikki Toivonen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to