[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2010-01-07 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #14 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-07 12:29:19 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13)

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2010-01-07 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #15 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-07 12:49:02 EDT --- (By the way the macro

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2010-01-06 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2010-01-06 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-06 12:43:38 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12)

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2010-01-05 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #11 from Michal Babej mba...@redhat.com 2010-01-05 09:47:28 EDT --- OK, i did some changes: - update to 2.2.16

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2010-01-05 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #12 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-05 12:47:06 EDT --- Well, I have not looked into

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-31 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-23 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-12-23 10:58:45 EDT --- Well, for now I won't object to

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-18 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #8 from Michal Babej mba...@redhat.com 2009-12-18 08:46:33 EDT --- I asked one of the developers, he said

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-11 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #7 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-12-11 12:45:19 EDT --- Well, then first of all how did

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-09 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #6 from Michal Babej mba...@redhat.com 2009-12-09 13:14:01 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) - It seems

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-07 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-04 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #4 from Michal Babej mba...@redhat.com 2009-12-04 11:31:46 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) * %define -

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-03 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 Michal Babej mba...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-03 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-12-03 13:23:10 EDT --- Some notes: * %define - %global

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-02 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-12-02 13:38:54 EDT --- $ gem list -b haml returns that

[Bug 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine

2009-12-02 Thread bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 --- Comment #2 from Michal Babej mba...@redhat.com 2009-12-02 14:42:15 EDT --- Done. Updated packages are at the same