Op donderdag 27 februari 2003 16:54, schreef Ola Lundqvist:
> > Packages that contain a runtime conforming to the Java 1.1
> > specification should provide java1-runtime. Packages that
> > contain a runtime conforming to the Java 2 specification
> > should provide java2-runtime. If a pack
Op donderdag 27 februari 2003 16:54, schreef Ola Lundqvist:
> > Packages that contain a runtime conforming to the Java 1.1
> > specification should provide java1-runtime. Packages that
> > contain a runtime conforming to the Java 2 specification
> > should provide java2-runtime. If a pack
> "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ola> I second this policy change. I would like one more to be able
Ola> to apply it.
Thirded (if it needed it).
--
Stephen
"And what do we burn apart from witches?"... "More witches!"
> "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ola> I second this policy change. I would like one more to be able
Ola> to apply it.
Thirded (if it needed it).
--
Stephen
"And what do we burn apart from witches?"... "More witches!"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTE
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> I second this policy change. I would like one more to be able
> to apply it.
Seconded again, this time with a signature. :)
b.
- --
Ben Burton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Public Key: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There is much to be said in favour of modern
> I second this policy change. I would like one more to be able
> to apply it.
Seconded.
b. :)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> I second this policy change. I would like one more to be able
> to apply it.
Seconded again, this time with a signature. :)
b.
- --
Ben Burton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Public Key: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There is much to be said in favour of modern
> I second this policy change. I would like one more to be able
> to apply it.
Seconded.
b. :)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 06:46:00AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >Hello
> >
> >On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 08:16:01AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
> >> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>
Hello.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 06:46:00AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >Hello
> >
> >On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 08:16:01AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
> >> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Hello
>
>On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 08:16:01AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
>> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >Hi
>> >
>> >Well there seems
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Hello
>
>On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 08:16:01AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
>> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >Hi
>> >
>> >Well there seems
Hello
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 08:16:01AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >Hi
> >
> >Well there seems to be some vauge statements in the policy. I assumed
> >that blackdown should present both java1-
Hello
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 08:16:01AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >Hi
> >
> >Well there seems to be some vauge statements in the policy. I assumed
> >that blackdown should present both java1-
According to Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Well there seems to be some vauge statements in the policy. I assumed
> that blackdown should present both java1-runtime _and_ java2-runtime
> becuse it can fulfill both runtime requirements (in reasonable way).
I agree that the Blackdown Java2 pac
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Hi
>
>Well there seems to be some vauge statements in the policy. I assumed
>that blackdown should present both java1-runtime _and_ java2-runtime
>becuse it can fulfill both runtime requirements (in reasonabl
reassign 182466 java-common
thanks
Hi
Well there seems to be some vauge statements in the policy. I assumed
that blackdown should present both java1-runtime _and_ java2-runtime
becuse it can fulfill both runtime requirements (in reasonable way).
What do people on the debian java list think about
According to Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Well there seems to be some vauge statements in the policy. I assumed
> that blackdown should present both java1-runtime _and_ java2-runtime
> becuse it can fulfill both runtime requirements (in reasonable way).
I agree that the Blackdown Java2 pac
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Hi
>
>Well there seems to be some vauge statements in the policy. I assumed
>that blackdown should present both java1-runtime _and_ java2-runtime
>becuse it can fulfill both runtime requirements (in reasonabl
reassign 182466 java-common
thanks
Hi
Well there seems to be some vauge statements in the policy. I assumed
that blackdown should present both java1-runtime _and_ java2-runtime
becuse it can fulfill both runtime requirements (in reasonable way).
What do people on the debian java list think about
20 matches
Mail list logo
