On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 13:28 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:00 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: 
> > I hope that eventually, we might be permitted to use the "real"
> > gnome-2-32 branch in GNOME git for this, rather than having to do it
> > elsewhere. If that branch is a "dead end" and would otherwise be unused,
> > then there's no harm in letting us use it as a more central location for
> > our collaboration, surely?
> I'm fine with you using the "real" gnome-2-32 branch.  Would even be
> nice to see another formal 2.32 release if enough patches accumulate.

That's great; thanks. I'll do a little more testing on the patches I've
cherry-picked into my trees, and then unless someone else has objected
in the meantime I'll push them.

> Per GNOME's six-month release cycle, upstream maintainers have pretty
> much wrapped up 3.0 and are now focused on 3.1.

Although presumably there will be 3.01 and 3.02 releases so those
branches aren't *quite* as orphaned as 2.32 yet :)

David Woodhouse                            Open Source Technology Centre
david.woodho...@intel.com                              Intel Corporation

evolution-hackers mailing list
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...

Reply via email to