On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 10:20:26AM +0200, Philipp Marek wrote:
> > > Any news on that?
> >
> > List is shorter, but still not done yet. :)
> >
> > > Not trying to spam you, but my alarm to ask just went off again... ;)
> >
> > No worries. Reminders are good.
> ping :|
Thanks for the
> > Any news on that?
>
> List is shorter, but still not done yet. :)
>
> > Not trying to spam you, but my alarm to ask just went off again... ;)
>
> No worries. Reminders are good.
ping :|
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:00:37PM +0200, Philipp Marek wrote:
Hi James,
While I understand the value of being able to test a build, I'd like
discuss the (IMO positive) value of having an untested binary package
in
experimental, as compared to having no package.
Agreed.
Hi James,
While I understand the value of being able to test a build, I'd like
discuss the (IMO positive) value of having an untested binary package in
experimental, as compared to having no package.
Agreed. Just trying to clear a few other things off my list before
getting to
While I understand the value of being able to test a build, I'd like
discuss the (IMO positive) value of having an untested binary package in
experimental, as compared to having no package.
Agreed. Just trying to clear a few other things off my list before
getting to this.
Thanks for
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 02:23:07PM +0200, Philipp Marek wrote:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752264 says
Fix blocked by 783044:
ITP: busted -- Lua unit testing framework focused on ease of use
While I understand the value of being able to test a build, I'd like
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752264 says
Fix blocked by 783044:
ITP: busted -- Lua unit testing framework focused on ease of use
While I understand the value of being able to test a build, I'd like
discuss the (IMO positive) value of having an untested binary
7 matches
Mail list logo
