Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 214536 + wontfix
Bug#214536: coq: Could you upgrade coq to version 7.4 ?
There were no tags set.
Tags added: wontfix
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administr
Hi,
coq 7.4 is still labeled by upstream as unstable, 7.3.1 is the last
stable release. Hence I don't think that it is a good idea to get
7.4 in sarge.
-Ralf.
--
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 214536 + wontfix
Bug#214536: coq: Could you upgrade coq to version 7.4 ?
There were no tags set.
Tags added: wontfix
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administr
Hi,
coq 7.4 is still labeled by upstream as unstable, 7.3.1 is the last
stable release. Hence I don't think that it is a good idea to get
7.4 in sarge.
-Ralf.
--
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 04:23:00PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Sven Luther said:
> > BTW, is this kind of stuff not against the ocaml manual licence or
> > something such ?
>
> previous ocaml-doc package used to ship this version of the documentation,
> if the license hasn't changed and if
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 04:23:00PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Sven Luther said:
> > BTW, is this kind of stuff not against the ocaml manual licence or
> > something such ?
>
> previous ocaml-doc package used to ship this version of the documentation,
> if the license hasn't changed and if
Sven Luther said:
> BTW, is this kind of stuff not against the ocaml manual licence or
> something such ?
previous ocaml-doc package used to ship this version of the documentation,
if the license hasn't changed and if previously it was ok then it shoult
be ok this time as well. (Yes, you're right,
Sven Luther said:
> BTW, is this kind of stuff not against the ocaml manual licence or
> something such ?
previous ocaml-doc package used to ship this version of the documentation,
if the license hasn't changed and if previously it was ok then it shoult
be ok this time as well. (Yes, you're right,
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 11:51:19AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> And here comes the enhanced documentation, to complete our ocaml 3.07
> offering.
>
> BTW, is this kind of stuff not against the ocaml manual licence or
> something such ?
The licence says
* Any translation or derivative work of
And here comes the enhanced documentation, to complete our ocaml 3.07
offering.
BTW, is this kind of stuff not against the ocaml manual licence or
something such ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
- Forwarded message from Hendrik Tews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 11:51:19AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> And here comes the enhanced documentation, to complete our ocaml 3.07
> offering.
>
> BTW, is this kind of stuff not against the ocaml manual licence or
> something such ?
The licence says
* Any translation or derivative work of
And here comes the enhanced documentation, to complete our ocaml 3.07
offering.
BTW, is this kind of stuff not against the ocaml manual licence or
something such ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
- Forwarded message from Hendrik Tews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-
12 matches
Mail list logo
