On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:30 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 21/06/16 16:26, Peter Weber wrote:
> > I don't see here an active discussion about Gtk+4.0[1]? So I'm trying to
> > write about my thoughts, in a careful way. In the first moment, I thought
> > this is a good idea and just
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:06 PM, wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:30 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 21/06/16 16:26, Peter Weber wrote:
>> > I don't see here an active discussion about Gtk+4.0[1]? So I'm trying to
>> > write about my thoughts, in a careful way. In the firs
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:06 PM wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:30 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 21/06/16 16:26, Peter Weber wrote:
>> > I don't see here an active discussion about Gtk+4.0[1]? So I'm trying to
>> > write about my thoughts, in a careful way. In the first
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:13 PM Jasper St. Pierre
wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:06 PM, wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:30 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 21/06/16 16:26, Peter Weber wrote:
>>> > I don't see here an active discussion about Gtk+4.0[1]? So I'm
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:36 PM, wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:13 PM Jasper St. Pierre
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:06 PM, wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:30 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <
>>> poch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
Hi,
On 21/06/16 16:26, Peter Weber w
Hi!
On Sat, 2016-07-09 at 19:06 +, philip.chime...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm expecting this will become less and less of a problem as apps move
> to Flatpak as a means of distribution.
Uhuuu. I'm sorry, but this is bad.
This mixes two completely different problems together, packaging and a
too
