On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 4:21 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jul 4, 2012, at 9:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>> Not really. We have nowhere else to recommend, since we don't run a
>> replacement for it. And we really don't want to get involved in
>> listing all the different third party sites ou
On Jul 4, 2012, at 9:15 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Not really. We have nowhere else to recommend, since we don't run a
> replacement for it. And we really don't want to get involved in
> listing all the different third party sites out there. (For example,
> we had a reference to sourceforge.net
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Attached are two patches, one of which I'd like to apply. Open for
>> discussion on which one.
>>
>> The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for
>> new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for t
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Attached are two patches, one of which I'd like to apply. Open for
> discussion on which one.
>
> The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for
> new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for this being that pgfoundry
> doesn't *accept* new projects an
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:01 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jul 3, 2012, at 9:20 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>> The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for
>> new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for this being that pgfoundry
>> doesn't *accept* new projects anymore.
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, July 3, 2012, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>>
>> On 3 July 2012 20:20, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> > The second one removes the reference to pgfoundry completely. As a
>> > step in the deprecation.
>> >
>> > I'd prefer to apply the secon
On Tuesday, July 3, 2012, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On 3 July 2012 20:20, Magnus Hagander >
> wrote:
> > The second one removes the reference to pgfoundry completely. As a
> > step in the deprecation.
> >
> > I'd prefer to apply the second one, but will settle for the first one
> > if people object
On 3 July 2012 20:20, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> The second one removes the reference to pgfoundry completely. As a
> step in the deprecation.
>
> I'd prefer to apply the second one, but will settle for the first one
> if people object ;)
I'd also prefer if you applied the second one.
--
Peter Ge
On Jul 3, 2012, at 9:20 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for
> new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for this being that pgfoundry
> doesn't *accept* new projects anymore.
Should you not perhaps recommend that they go somewhere else?
Attached are two patches, one of which I'd like to apply. Open for
discussion on which one.
The smaller one, pgfoundry_1.diff, removes the suggestion to apply for
new projects on pgfoundry. The reason for this being that pgfoundry
doesn't *accept* new projects anymore.
The second one removes the
10 matches
Mail list logo