On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 09:54:11PM +0100, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
On gio, 24 nov 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
I mailed you guys now because I think that by that time, it is no longer
possible to consider doing anything for etch, and that changes like
discontinuing a branch of
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 09:57:00AM +0100, A Mennucc wrote:
Too many zope(s)? That was discussed already. Problem is: there are a
lot of differences between zope2.6, zope2.7 and zope2.8 : you cannot
simply upgrade and hope your portal will continue to work. Some time
ago I had a conversation
On gio, 24 nov 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
I mailed you guys now because I think that by that time, it is no longer
possible to consider doing anything for etch, and that changes like
discontinuing a branch of software in Debian take time.
Anyway, thank you all for considering this,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 12:40:23AM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 09:53:37PM +0100, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
On dom, 20 nov 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
Why isn't the canonical zope version simply called 'zope' here? If I'd
remove zope, there will be no
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 11:01:32AM +0200, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
The following source packages should be removed from unstable, since they
are old versions of Zope server and Zope products and have been superseded
by new versions:
zope
On dom, 20 nov 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
Why isn't the canonical zope version simply called 'zope' here? If I'd
remove zope, there will be no 'zope' package anymore for people to install.
Well, in my opinion having no 'zope' package is a good thing: zope
development is focused on two
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 09:53:37PM +0100, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
On dom, 20 nov 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
Why isn't the canonical zope version simply called 'zope' here? If I'd
remove zope, there will be no 'zope' package anymore for people to install.
Well, in my opinion
Jeroen van Wolffelaar writes:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 09:53:37PM +0100, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
On dom, 20 nov 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
Why isn't the canonical zope version simply called 'zope' here? If I'd
remove zope, there will be no 'zope' package anymore for people to
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 01:16:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
Jeroen van Wolffelaar writes:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 09:53:37PM +0100, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
On dom, 20 nov 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
Why isn't the canonical zope version simply called 'zope' here? If I'd
retitle 335488 RM: zope -- RoM; superseded by zope2.7, zope2.8
thanks
Fabio Tranchitella [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
The following source packages, instead, have been orphaned by the respective
maintainers and nobody is taking care of them. They all depends on zope (=
2.6),
which we are
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
The following source packages should be removed from unstable, since they
are old versions of Zope server and Zope products and have been superseded
by new versions:
zope (superseded by zope2.7, zope2.8)
zopectl (useless package without zope)
11 matches
Mail list logo
