Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
Given all this, would still be possible to consider this for etch ?
...which would require another round of main and non-free conglomeration
packages in NEW, together with removals in testing and unstable of the
non-free ones. Don't know if we can make this happen
Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
Well, what does -release have to say about this?
just for the sake of clarity: the conglomeration packages i can upload
myself, but i have (oviously) no influence on NEW handling and testing
migration, so RM may say if they would like to help getting it in.
Btw,
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 11:43:15AM +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote:
Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
Given all this, would still be possible to consider this for etch ?
...which would require another round of main and non-free conglomeration
packages in NEW, together with removals in testing and
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 01:13:09PM +0100, Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 11:43:15AM +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote:
Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
Given all this, would still be possible to consider this for etch ?
...which would require another round of main and
4 matches
Mail list logo
