On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 04:39:17PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > you published on Monday, I dont think there is any need to apologize for
> > it. I believe publishing on Monday or Tuesday is totally fine
> Regular is rationally and irrationally good for both reader and writer :)
if "regular" is th
> you published on Monday, I dont think there is any need to apologize for
> it. I believe publishing on Monday or Tuesday is totally fine
Regular is rationally and irrationally good for both reader and writer :)
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debi
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 08:52:09AM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Well, I would never publish without any review - just would prefer to
> have given more! :)
me too, indeed.
> I regrettably ended up delaying further and have just published. Apologies
> this wasn't live until now.
you published on Mo
Chris Lamb:
>> (I've added two bits about t.r-b.o.)
>
> ACK, thank you.
>
>> looks nice & thanks for giving some time to review!
>
> Well, I would never publish without any review - just would prefer to
> have given more! :)
>
> I regrettably ended up delaying further and have just published. A
> (I've added two bits about t.r-b.o.)
ACK, thank you.
> looks nice & thanks for giving some time to review!
Well, I would never publish without any review - just would prefer to
have given more! :)
I regrettably ended up delaying further and have just published. Apologies
this wasn't live unti
Hi Chris,
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 08:33:40PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Apologies for the delay but I mismanaged my time this morning so have
> only just managed to push the draft for week 72s report to blog.git.
> I plan to publish it:
> - http://time.is/compare/2345_11_Sept_2016_in_London
look
Hi all,
Apologies for the delay but I mismanaged my time this morning so have
only just managed to push the draft for week 72s report to blog.git.
I plan to publish it:
- http://time.is/compare/2345_11_Sept_2016_in_London
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'`
