On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 08:23:31PM +0100, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> On Thursday 04 January 2007 19:53, Dan Trainor wrote:
> > Hi, all -
> >
> > Now, Kern, I noticed that you're noted as the RPM package maintainer for
> > the 1.38 series - should the same be assumed about the 2.0 series, as
> > well?
On Thursday 04 January 2007 19:53, Dan Trainor wrote:
> Hi, all -
>
> Now, Kern, I noticed that you're noted as the RPM package maintainer for
> the 1.38 series - should the same be assumed about the 2.0 series, as
> well?
Well, I may be "listed" as the maintainer, but Scott Barninger is the gu
Hi, all -
Now, Kern, I noticed that you're noted as the RPM package maintainer for
the 1.38 series - should the same be assumed about the 2.0 series, as
well?
I guess what I'm getting at is, I'm sure there are a few people who are
plenty eager to find a nice SRPM for the 2.0 series, because we
