On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 11:53 +0200, Mark Roberts wrote: > On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, Murray Cumming wrote: > > > It sounds like a gtkmm 2.18 installer would indeed be useful, and it > > sounds like Tor should be encouraged to do a GTK+ installer. That would > > mean that we all had the same stuff to work with, so we could get some > > real information about those bugs. > > Mark Roberts wrote: > > > We don't want someone new using it and then abandoning gtk on the > > grounds that it's buggy. [...] > > The installer would have to be marked as "instable" or "buggy" or "beta" > or something. That way we can follow up the remaining bugs without letting > people stumble over it that were looking for pre-packaged, great, > 100%-bugfree software.
Yes. -- [email protected] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
