On 2016-10-25 07:33 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Ian Jackson
>
> > * Specifically, failed to give clear and constructive directions to
> >those willing to do the work;
>
> I disagree with those characterisations. He's asked for clarifications
> on what is broken without anything
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 09:03:40AM +0200, Philip Hands wrote:
> Ron writes:
>
> ...
> > That's basically why "just nuke htags now" is starting to look like
> > a viable, and even sensible, option. But it's tricky to know who
> > might be upset by that - and we don't have a
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Wei Liu
>
>> On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 05:47:27 +1030 Ron wrote:
>> [...]
>> > That's basically why "just nuke htags now" is starting to look like
>> > a viable, and even sensible, option. But it's tricky to
Philip Hands writes:
...
> How viable is it to have two conflicting packages:
>
> global5: continuing as you have it now
>(perhaps with patches to make it work for recent use cases)
>
> global6: (with htags support removed)
Ah, I see -- I had somehow got the
Ron writes:
...
> That's basically why "just nuke htags now" is starting to look like
> a viable, and even sensible, option. But it's tricky to know who
> might be upset by that - and we don't have a clear idea of exactly
> what we'd really gain elsewhere from that tradeoff,
On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 7:49 AM, Ron wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 05:41:54PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
>> ❦ 22 octobre 2016 14:44 +1030, Ron :
>>
[...]
>
> Without repeating what I already said above about this option, we do
> already have some
❦ 25 octobre 2016 07:33 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen :
>> * Specifically, failed to give clear and constructive directions to
>>those willing to do the work;
>
> I disagree with those characterisations. He's asked for clarifications
> on what is broken without anything resembling
7 matches
Mail list logo