On 2013-05-22 17:31, tony mancill wrote:
> [...]
>
> Hi Niels,
>
> I appreciate your feedback. I guess Java7 should be considered a
> "transition" and thus should go through the Release Team.
>
At least that is what I suspect.
> IMO, I don't think we need 100% success on the rebuild - i.e. I'
On 05/22/2013 12:42 AM, Niels Thykier wrote:
> On 2013-05-22 06:52, tony mancill wrote:
>> Dear Debian Java List,
>>
>> In an attempt to advance the use of openjdk7 for jessie, I have uploaded
>> java-common 0.49 (essentially the same 0.48 package that was in
>> experimental, but now targeting unst
On 2013-05-22 06:52, tony mancill wrote:
> Dear Debian Java List,
>
> In an attempt to advance the use of openjdk7 for jessie, I have uploaded
> java-common 0.49 (essentially the same 0.48 package that was in
> experimental, but now targeting unstable) to the DELAYED/3 queue.
>
> The delay is bec
Dear Debian Java List,
In an attempt to advance the use of openjdk7 for jessie, I have uploaded
java-common 0.49 (essentially the same 0.48 package that was in
experimental, but now targeting unstable) to the DELAYED/3 queue.
The delay is because I didn't coordinate with Matthias, Niels or Torste
4 matches
Mail list logo
