On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 13:43, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 09:53 +, Daniel Drake wrote:
>> On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 09:45 +, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>> > We'll need that they make explicit which modules want to take
>> > maintenance of and then each current maintainer should agree
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 7:43 AM, Daniel Drake wrote:
On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 09:53 +, Daniel Drake wrote:
On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 09:45 +, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> We'll need that they make explicit which modules want to take
> maintenance of and then each current maintainer should agree or
>
On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 09:53 +, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 09:45 +, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> > We'll need that they make explicit which modules want to take
> > maintenance of and then each current maintainer should agree or
> > disagree.
>
> All of glucose, I guess. Right now
On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 09:45 +, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> We'll need that they make explicit which modules want to take
> maintenance of and then each current maintainer should agree or
> disagree.
All of glucose, I guess. Right now we only have patches for
sugar-toolkit and sugar.
Daniel
__
Hi,
Daniel Drake and Sayamindu Dasgupta have offered to take maintenance
of the 0.84 branches of some modules in glucose and fructose.
I'm happy about this because apart from their technical capabilities,
they are working for OLPC's deployments so can know better what their
needs are.
Any concer
5 matches
Mail list logo
