Guys,
I'm planning to do some more performance improvement for the
Camel/DBSummary code that, I added during gnome-2-24. I just figured
that I might end up breaking Camel ABI/API. But, I wanted to do it
stable, as the benefits of it will be much.
The entire API set was new in gnome-2-24, EDS
Hey
On 9/29/08, Srinivasa Ragavan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I asked Vuntz on the r-t channel, he was fine, but asked me to
just check on the d-d-l, if any one is affected of this.
You can anyway mention a small list of such API changes later, so if
anyone was using it or planning on
Hi all,
Just thinking about it ...
Wouldn't it be reasonable to enable everything the first time the user
logs in and the if no accessible technology has been used ask if they
have to be turned off by default (and with a little explain about how to
re-enable them)?
My 5 cents,
El dl 22 de 09
Hi all,
As with previous GNOME releases, I've been tagging articles mentioning
the 2.24 release with the tag gnome224 (that is, I have been tagging
releases since 2.16 - this is the first time I've used the gnome224 tag
- just to avoid any pedantry ;) )
You can catch reviews of GNOME 2.24 at
Hi,
Apologies - I sent this from the incorrect address. I suspect the recent
changes in forwarding bounces on gnome.org caught the emails which would
have told me my email was being held in moderation (and if I had
received them, I would have cancelled the posts and resent).
Cheers,
Dave.
Dave
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 01:51:23PM +0200, Dave Neary wrote:
Apologies - I sent this from the incorrect address. I suspect the recent
changes in forwarding bounces on gnome.org caught the emails which would
have told me my email was being held in moderation (and if I had
received them, I would
I branched libsoup for 2.24. (Actually, I did this last week and just
never sent mail.) Someone already updated jhbuild. Not cc'ing docs and
i18n since libsoup has neither.
Plans for 2.26: unclear. The burst of activity around
libsoup+webkit+epiphany last spring that then quickly died out seems
Hi,
I am implementing a feature in bug-buddy which allows to log the
critical/fatal messages and post them to the bug report along with the
stacktrace for better debugging [1].
Right now the bug-buddy --include option (which I use to insert a temp
file containing the logged messages) pastes the
