Accepted cpbk 4.1.0-5 (i386 source)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:01:01 +0600 Source: cpbk Binary: cpbk Architecture: source i386 Version: 4.1.0-5 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Andrew D. Lenharth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Andrew D. Lenharth [EMAIL PROTECTED

Accepted bookmark-merge 0.9-2 (all source)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:15:41 -0400 Source: bookmark-merge Binary: bookmark-merge Architecture: source all Version: 0.9-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Andrew D. Lenharth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Andrew D. Lenharth

Accepted cpbk 4.1.0-4 (i386 source)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 23:01:01 +0600 Source: cpbk Binary: cpbk Architecture: source i386 Version: 4.1.0-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Andrew D. Lenharth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Andrew D. Lenharth [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10)

I agree, I would like to see a system where major releases and minor releases exist. (No, we really do not have this as I envision it). The major releases would be the base system and libraries (libc, X, kernel, compilers, etc) and the minor releases would be much more frequent and only be non

Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10)

This is quite different. David said he wanted MAJOR packages included in the updates (e.g. X). You said you agreed, yet you talked of _only_ minor apps being upgraded. I be happier seeing a new X in proposed-updates if it's package maintainer were happier with it than the one currently in