I would appreciate if the subject of this thread was changed to reflect the apparent shift in topic, given that this appears to have been a configuration issue.
GJC --- Adam Fedor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2005-10-12 12:54:32 -0600 Armando Di Cianno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > So, I've read the thread here: > > > > On 2005-10-12 14:16:25 -0400 Adam Fedor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/discuss-gnustep/2004-01/msg00642.html > > > > Is it safe to assume that that proposal, with the comments that > > clarified it, are what's being implemented? If I have patches that > > better implement this proposal, or fix bugs, etceteras, will they be > > welcomed? I ask, because the discussion seemed to go: > > We'll, we're interested in implementing/finishing off the general idea > implied in the post. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss-gnustep mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep > Gregory John Casamento -- CEO/President Open Logic Corp. (A MD Corp.) ## Maintainer of Gorm (IB Equiv.) for GNUstep. _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
