- Original Message -
I'm waiting for objections.
I'm going to raise one :(
So far we don't have any objections. If there are no objections in
day or so
I will offiically change the release schedule.
Will's question is not answered yet.
| Would the PIM team spend the
On xxMondayxx 13 xxDecemberxx 2010 14:35:07 Tom Albers wrote:
- Original Message -
I'm waiting for objections.
I'm going to raise one :(
So far we don't have any objections. If there are no objections in
day or so
I will offiically change the release schedule.
Ok, I withdraw my request then.
Thanks for the discussion.
On Monday 13 December 2010 9:05:46 am Anne-Marie Mahfouf wrote:
On xxMondayxx 13 xxDecemberxx 2010 14:35:07 Tom Albers wrote:
- Original Message -
I'm waiting for objections.
I'm going to raise one :(
So
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 08:05, Anne-Marie Mahfouf an...@kde.org wrote:
On xxMondayxx 13 xxDecemberxx 2010 14:35:07 Tom Albers wrote:
- Original Message -
I'm waiting for objections.
I'm going to raise one :(
So far we don't have any objections. If there are no objections in
- Original Message -
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 08:05, Anne-Marie Mahfouf an...@kde.org
wrote:
On xxMondayxx 13 xxDecemberxx 2010 14:35:07 Tom Albers wrote:
- Original Message -
I'm waiting for objections.
I'm going to raise one :(
So far we don't have any
Ian, Togge,
Personally, I don't think you need to have the Release Team stamp-of-approval
on any Git Migration messages you send out to the development community.
But if you want or need help please ask.
Mostly, I think people just want to see a schedule, along with warnings/nags.
-Allen
Dirk,
We were discussing in #kde-sysadmin whether it made sense to move not
just trunk/4.7 development to Git next week, but 4.6 as well. No one
really likes the idea of having two SCMs active at the same time,
which was the current plan.
Do you consider putting together the release scripts in
- Original Message -
Dirk,
We were discussing in #kde-sysadmin whether it made sense to move not
just trunk/4.7 development to Git next week, but 4.6 as well. No one
really likes the idea of having two SCMs active at the same time,
which was the current plan.
Do you consider
Am Montag, 13. Dezember 2010, um 22:44:04 schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
A Dilluns, 13 de desembre de 2010, Ian Monroe va escriure:
Dirk,
We were discussing in #kde-sysadmin whether it made sense to move not
just trunk/4.7 development to Git next week, but 4.6 as well. No one
really likes the
On Tuesday 14 December 2010, Pavel Heimlich, a.k.a. hajma wrote:
this is not true on Solaris
see the ieeefp.h there:
http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/head/ieeefp.h
the build on solaris is broken now:
http://my.cdash.org/index.php?project=kdeedudate=2010-12-11
On Monday, December 13, 2010 16:49:29 Tom Albers wrote:
- Original Message -
Dirk,
We were discussing in #kde-sysadmin whether it made sense to move not
just trunk/4.7 development to Git next week, but 4.6 as well. No one
really likes the idea of having two SCMs active at the
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 22:53:50 -0500
Michael Pyne mp...@kde.org wrote:
On Monday, December 13, 2010 16:49:29 Tom Albers wrote:
- Original Message -
Dirk,
We were discussing in #kde-sysadmin whether it made sense to move not
just trunk/4.7 development to Git next week, but 4.6
12 matches
Mail list logo
