Jean Christophe ANDRÉ wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> Le lundi 15 décembre 2003 à 16h19 (+0100), Martin Schulze écrivait :
> > > The last stable release is 3.0r2, as announced here:
> > > http://www.debian.org/News/2003/20031121a
> > No. The last stable release is Debian GNU/Linux 3.0, which wa
Hi everybody,
Le lundi 15 décembre 2003 à 16h19 (+0100), Martin Schulze écrivait :
> > The last stable release is 3.0r2, as announced here:
> > http://www.debian.org/News/2003/20031121a
> No. The last stable release is Debian GNU/Linux 3.0, which was
> released on July 19th, 2002. http
Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Jesús Delicado Martínez in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >The last release of Debian is 3.0r1 in the Fist Feet, but in last news,
> > on 21th November, there is another release stable, the release 3.0r2. So,
> > what is the last stable release?
>
> The last stable release
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:29:14PM +0100, Jesús Delicado Martínez wrote:
> The last release of Debian is 3.0r1 in the Fist Feet, but in last
> news, on 21th November, there is another release stable, the release
> 3.0r2. So, what is the last stable release?
The latest release is indeed 3.0r2. Due
Re: Jesús Delicado Martínez in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>The last release of Debian is 3.0r1 in the Fist Feet, but in last news, on
> 21th November, there is another release stable, the release 3.0r2. So, what
> is the last stable release?
The last stable release is 3.0r2, as announced here:
The last release of Debian is 3.0r1 in
the Fist Feet, but in last news, on 21th November, there is another release
stable, the release 3.0r2. So, what is the last stable release?
Regards.
Jesús Delicado.
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I wanted to know when you would be putting out a new version supporting
>kernel 2.4.
You can look back through the archives of the debian-devel-announce
mailing list to find some of the release manager's plans, but there's
nothing definite. At the v
I wanted to know when you would be putting out a new version supporting
kernel 2.4.
Ok, everyone who said ``the Incremental release process is
cool, but we'd like to have some code first'': the coding
starts officially today (my Zope server is online, and I
finally have some time off the job).
Those willing to code, let's get things done.
I was thinking of a temporary mailing li
On Tue, Oct 26, 1999 at 11:36:30AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 07:37:55AM -0700, Robert Jones wrote:
> > Quoth Anthony Towns on 25 Oct, 1999:
>
>
> All this `I've got a proposal, let's vote on it' stuff isn't quite right.
> We didn't vote on debconf, we discussed it, the
Quoth Anthony Towns on 26 Oct, 1999:
> > Quoth Anthony Towns on 25 Oct, 1999:
> (Saith?)
Hrm. Perhaps.
> Without a prototype, we shouldn't be voting. Throwing out ideas,
> is fine, we've alreay done a lot of that, even before Lalo said
> anything. Personally, I was finally getting around to try
On Tue, Oct 26, 1999 at 11:27:06AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 05:29:46PM -0200, Lalo Martins wrote:
>
> [package-pool/hardlinks/mirror bandwidth efficiency]
> > Jason informs me this is already done by rsync, and we're
> > moving our mirrors to rsync, so, this is already
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 07:37:55AM -0700, Robert Jones wrote:
> Quoth Anthony Towns on 25 Oct, 1999:
(Saith?)
> [ Disclaimer: I am not a Debian developer yet, due to the new-maintainer
*sigh*
> > First, proposals without code are pointless. They're fun and all to
> > discuss and such, but they
least one counter-cite for reference:
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-devel-9808/msg01028.html
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-devel-9808/msg01050.html
> Or in other words: When debconf was brought up, there was
> consensus. If there hadn't been, it would hav
fficial'' then
the techs who want it done will implement it just like happened
with debconf.
Or in other words: When debconf was brought up, there was
consensus. If there hadn't been, it would have to be voted on
first. Even if it wasn't voted on, anyone could just have gone
and co
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 01:30:44PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Martin Schulze wrote:
>
> > Thus if the project (or the project leader) wants things to be
> > done with the archive, the ftpmasters have to get it implemented
> > (with or without help from others) or they will have to
Previously Martin Schulze wrote:
> Then why? Does a proper bug report exist? Is it just slowly processing
> bug report? Or is it something else?
There is indeed a bugreport, and it's old. Months at least. Last I heard
the only reason was that it was a lot of work...
Wichert.
--
__
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > The ftpmasters do their work for the project. They exist
> > on behalf of the project. The project does not exist as result
> > of the ftpmasters, it's vice versa.
>
> True. However that doesn't always seem to work that way. A good example
> is that we have a consensu
Previously Martin Schulze wrote:
> Apparently I wasn't clear enough.
I had already posted by then...
> The ftpmasters do their work for the project. They exist
> on behalf of the project. The project does not exist as result
> of the ftpmasters, it's vice versa.
True. However that doesn't alwa
Quoth Anthony Towns on 25 Oct, 1999:
[ Disclaimer: I am not a Debian developer yet, due to the new-maintainer
freeze. I have been following the project for a while, however. Please
forgive if this is out of order. ]
> First, proposals without code are pointless. They're fun and all to
> d
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 03:18:47AM -0200, Lalo Martins wrote:
> Also, could you people please stop for a moment and really evaluate
> the ammount of code needed? Get real: this is _trivial_.
We'd need code to:
* make life easy for the mirrors (either a working package pool,
or t
On Sun, Oct 24, 1999 at 08:32:07PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> That said, this proposal has no meaning without an actual implementation
> of 'Package Pools', and none exists yet. However I know of at least 2
> efforts to make one, so maybe it should be shelved until one gets
> finished? [It
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 12:29:23PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 1999 at 07:34:26PM -0200, Lalo Martins wrote:
> > I'm formally proposing the release process that we have been
> > discussing for over a year, known as ``package pool'', for
> > discussion and voting. The discussion wi
[Lame cross post to -announce removed, gah]
> The ftpmasters do their work for the project. They exist
> on behalf of the project. The project does not exist as result
> of the ftpmasters, it's vice versa.
However, the FTP masters are the resident experts in field of 'ftp archive
mainti', igno
On Sun, Oct 24, 1999 at 07:34:26PM -0200, Lalo Martins wrote:
> I'm formally proposing the release process that we have been
> discussing for over a year, known as ``package pool'', for
> discussion and voting. The discussion will take place on
> debian-project. Anyone interested should follow this
25 matches
Mail list logo
