--On February 19, 2014 1:39:38 AM -0500 Mike Alexander
wrote:
Updated via https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash/commit/6390beb5
(commit)from https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash/commit/80cd6d72
(commit)
commit 6390beb59f19a845c31fec993a1aca9021b8462f
Author: Mike Alexander
Date: We
On Tuesday 18 February 2014 11:01:32 Derek Atkins wrote:
> Geert Janssens writes:
> > On Thursday 02 January 2014 10:15:55 Derek Atkins wrote:
> >> Geert Janssens writes:
> >> > That's actually to be expected if I consider how code
> >> > synchronizes
> >> > to
> >> > github. For each push it
> >
On Feb 18, 2014, at 8:58 AM, Derek Atkins wrote:
> John Ralls writes:
>
>>> Question is: should we keep providing downloads for these old versions
>>> in the interest of archaeology ? If so the path should stay.
>>>
>>> If not what do we do with the historical news messages ?
>>>
>>
>> Del
John Ralls writes:
>> Question is: should we keep providing downloads for these old versions
>> in the interest of archaeology ? If so the path should stay.
>>
>> If not what do we do with the historical news messages ?
>>
>
> Delete it all. I see no benefit to maintaining archival tarballs. I
Geert Janssens writes:
> Oh right,
>
> I remember that mail now.
>
> I'll just apply your patch as is.
>
> Out of curiosity: is the pc file a new addition in libdbi 0.9 ?
Perhaps we could use pkg-config and, if it fails, fall back to the
hard-coded list?
> Geert
-derek
--
Derek Atkins
Hi,
Cristian Marchi writes:
> Thanks Geert, [1] is surely the same problem I reported when it's
> clear that there is a difference between customer and vendor jobs. In
> fact, I was expecting only a unique job definition to which you can
> link customer (generally one) and vendors.
>
> I was sim
Geert Janssens writes:
> On Thursday 02 January 2014 10:15:55 Derek Atkins wrote:
>> Geert Janssens writes:
>> > That's actually to be expected if I consider how code synchronizes
>> > to
>> > github. For each push it
>> > receives, code runs a git push --all to push the same changes to
>> > git
On Feb 18, 2014, at 1:23 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
> On Thursday 09 January 2014 10:10:05 John Ralls wrote:
>> I'm reviewing/updating README in response to
>> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=721608 , and there's a
>> link there to the subject URI.
>>
>> It looks like the sources ther
On Tuesday 18 February 2014 14:31:02 Geert Janssens wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 February 2014 13:02:11 Cristian Marchi wrote:
> > Just curious to know the timing for the windows nightly build:
> > latest
> > package is dated February first. Is a newer package missing due to
> > the svn->git switch?
>
>
On Tuesday 18 February 2014 13:02:11 Cristian Marchi wrote:
> Just curious to know the timing for the windows nightly build: latest
> package is dated February first. Is a newer package missing due to the
> svn->git switch?
>
Close. The builds started failing because of the migration of the code
Just curious to know the timing for the windows nightly build: latest
package is dated February first. Is a newer package missing due to the
svn->git switch?
Thanks
Cristian
___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucas
On Thursday 09 January 2014 10:10:05 John Ralls wrote:
> I'm reviewing/updating README in response to
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=721608 , and there's a
> link there to the subject URI.
>
> It looks like the sources there stopped being updated at the end of
> 2010 when we released
12 matches
Mail list logo
