Hi,
Modestas Vainius wrote:
> On 2009 m. March 30 d., Monday 15:03:59 Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote:
> > I have found a hack/solution to work around ban-unstable-uploads. I've
> > tested it locally, and it appears to work. So my question changes into:
> > Should I go ahead and upload to unstable wi
Hello,
On 2009 m. March 30 d., Monday 15:03:59 Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote:
> I have found a hack/solution to work around ban-unstable-uploads. I've
> tested it locally, and it appears to work. So my question changes into:
> Should I go ahead and upload to unstable with that hack, or would that
>
On 2009-03-29, Thomas Friedrichsmeier
wrote:
> So I'm wondering, how to proceed. Can you give an estimate on how long=20
> ban-unstable-uploads will remain in effect? If that's more than ~two weeks =
> or=20
By judging the latest mails to d-d-a by Adeodato Simo, it is not more
that ~two weeks fr
Hi,
On Sunday 29 March 2009, Mark Purcell wrote:
> I would recommend you do what you did for v0.5.0b and upload to
> experimental.
>
> That way at least there will be a fixed version in the Debian archive
> albeit this won't fix the version in unstable. Unstable isn't supposed to
> be fully workin
On Monday 30 March 2009 04:26:24 Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote:
> Now the problem is, the version of rkward in unstable is already based on
> KDE 4 (it was uploaded in June 2008). This version is terribly broken right
> now (admittedly it has been badly broken for a while, but things have
> deterioa
Hello Debian KDE maintainers,
while preparing a new release for RKWard, I have run into that
ban-unstable-uploads thing. As far as I understand (which may not be correct,
I've been very short on time the past few months, and have hardly followed
discussions), this is so you are free to do some
6 matches
Mail list logo
