Stéphane Magnenat wrote: >> hmm.. >> what you had suggested sounds like a schema but i guess to have everybody >> notice that glob2a is not used anymore we would need something different. >> glob2a_old >> glob2b_old >> glob2c_old >> glob2d >> ? > > Yes, that is nice. Should we go for this naming? Do you agree for me to > renamed the current glob2-new into glob2b, and the current glob2-old into > glob2a-old?
Bradley said it was somehow evil to have a changing repo name. didn't get what his problem was. maybe he wants to explain it here on the ml but i think he doesn't read the ml much _______________________________________________ glob2-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/glob2-devel
