Re: [Harbour] Harbour Web site - Preview #2 (Update)

On Tuesday 28 October 2008 08:28:53 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > We could have some HarbourScript though, just to give > a flash of this technology My thoughts exactly. -- "Ninety percent of politicians give the other 10 percent a bad name." -- Henry Kissinger

Re: [Harbour] Harbour Web site - Preview #2 (Update)

On Tuesday 28 October 2008 03:50:45 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > > I would suggest to start with few samples and add more only after they > > are carefully reviewed by the group ( we could create a new dir in the > > svn to hold the official samples and demos, Viktor? ). > > Sure. We already have '

Re: [Harbour] Harbour Web site - Preview #2 (Update)

On Thursday 30 October 2008 05:08:10 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > We have a mailing-list. > > [ which "happens" to be replicated in several newsgroups/web > sites, making it much complicated (or even possible) to find > anything via web search engines (Google), due to multiple matches > from these di

Re: [Harbour] Clipper RL compilation problem

On Tuesday 11 November 2008 05:01:15 am Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > Have you checked it? > You'll be very surprised if you will make some tests. > In tests/speedtst.prg tests 1-15 checks the speed of > local, static, public, privates and fields. > Do you see noticeable speed difference between firs

[Harbour] Mail problems

I'm experiencing mail problems and the ones on the list are probably related. I'm working on it. I may have to take the list off of the Mailscanner route. That's easy to do and probably my next step. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org h

[Harbour] test

test ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour

Re: [Spam] Re: [Harbour] test

Jacek Kubica wrote: Hello Phil, Monday, January 05, 2009, 1:23:03 PM, you wrote: PB> test PB> ___ PB> Harbour mailing list PB> Harbour@harbour-project.org PB> http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour test PASSED ;-) IMHO all old lis

Re: [Harbour] "Self" variable is not showed in debugger

Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Teo Fonrouge wrote: Hi Teo, As subject. The following sample will not show the Self variable in the Monitor->Local menu option when compiled with -b option: [...] because now it's fully optimized during compilation. If you want to disabl

Re: [Harbour] Fwd: SF.net SVN: harbour-project:[10057] trunk/harbour/ChangeLog

Viktor Szakáts wrote: Mmmm... Yes, perhaps. I'm nor shure if mailling list has possibility to allow *...@sourceforge.net users. Otherwise every "sourceforge.net developer" one by one should be added to list. This can have also

Re: [Harbour] Fwd: SF.net SVN: harbour-project:[10057] trunk/harbour/ChangeLog

Mindaugas Kavaliauskas wrote: Viktor Szakáts wrote: Maybe some sort of forwarder e-mail address could do the job. Mmmm... Yes, perhaps. I'm nor shure if mailling list has possibility to allow *...@sourceforge.net users. Otherwise every "sourceforge.net developer" one by one should be added

Re: [Harbour] Fwd: SF.net SVN: harbour-project:[10057] trunk/harbour/ChangeLog

Viktor Szakáts wrote: IMO this is a developer list so such mails are expected, if we split the lists into two, it will be complicated (and error prone) to simply reply to those commit e-mails (this is very useful and also common practice), which kind of defeats the purpose, as the manual Chang

Re: [Harbour] Fwd: SF.net SVN: harbour-project:[10057] trunk/harbour/ChangeLog

Viktor Szakáts wrote: Not very good. Since you _must_ subscribe to and monitor yet another list, even if you just want to be informed about the changes, just like before. What is the problem with my proposal? You are creating a feed to the mail system that there is no way to opt out of, thu

Re: [Harbour] Fwd: SF.net SVN: harbour-project:[10057] trunk/harbour/ChangeLog

Viktor Szakáts wrote: Hi Phil, What is the problem with my proposal? You are creating a feed to the mail system that there is no way to opt out of, thus giving regular subscribers no way to reduce their mail burden. Sure you can filter i away, but only after you have

Re: [Harbour] Fwd: SF.net SVN: harbour-project:[10057] trunk/harbour/ChangeLog

Viktor Szakáts wrote: >Anyhow I feel this will lead to a mess, where some ppl don't get informed about changes, because not being subscribed to the other list, and because of this, some developers will continue to send manual ChangeLogs, creating double notifications for those who subscribed.

Re: [Harbour] Fwd: SF.net SVN: harbour-project:[10057] trunk/harbour/ChangeLog

Viktor Szakáts wrote: Hi Phil, Yes, that looks like it. I can build mailboxes on the domain and I can forward them. I can join harbour@harbour-project.org with the nomail option set. Does that sound like it will work? nomail means d

Re: [Harbour] A Bunch of Thanks

Pritpal Bedi wrote: Today, I have deployed in production all of my applications, under the brand name "Vouch", compiled with Harbour, and have discontinued support for Clipper compilations for ever. Everything, everywhere, with every application, is running fine. That is so cool, Pritpal. C

Re: [Harbour] Date-Time Functions - Revisited (II)

Viktor Szakáts wrote: Very ugly indeed. Well, I think offset is pretty much enough for most practical business purposes, and it doesn't block the way for 3rd party tools to implement "proper" (if we can use this word for the TZ system of the world in practice ;) TZ support with all the gory det

Re: [Harbour] Website layout updated!

Vailton Renato wrote: The Harbour's site has new layout. I have update the ftp with the changes what we reviewed here in the list. Some points to highlight: * If you're missing some information on page 'Crew list' please send me again because I probably would have deleted or lost. :S * On the

Re: [Harbour] Date-Time Functions - Revisited (II)

Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Phil Barnett wrote: Hi Phil, I have no idea however, how to introduce offset in syntaxes in an elegant way, especially in the fixed position format. I believe that the last time this came up, I pointed out that I had completed all the

Re: [Harbour] Re: Intresting corner of info

Massimo Belgrano wrote: Another posting of Steffen that reply to xbase is the only multitread project require a reply? Steffen's Response to my post on Pritpal Bedi take on Multi- threading. Thank you for posting this. We should welcome input like this. It's very difficult to get a reasonably

Re: [Harbour] mpkg_win.nsi issue

Viktor Szakáts wrote: Exactly, plus some more: - You often need to be admin to do it. (if you rename Harbour installer to setup.exe, it will ask for password, Windows does this "intelligently" by itself) - They sometimes fail if you change the default install path. - You cannot be sure you

Re: [Harbour] hbmk2 - notes2

Viktor Szakáts wrote: One of these is passing down C options through hbmk command line to the C compiler f.e.. If I recall correctly, I solved this problem in PBMake by creating a link script preprocessor that was able to manipulate the link script based on various external influences. T

[Harbour] Next Beta

Przemek, when can we release a new beta for testing? ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour

Re: [Harbour] Next Beta

On Wednesday 12 December 2007 04:48:54 am Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Phil Barnett wrote: > > Przemek, when can we release a new beta for testing? > > Yes sure, > I only want to know what modifications plan to add other developers > and I'll sync beta

Re: [Harbour] Next Beta

On Friday 14 December 2007 02:49:28 am Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > My advice: let's mark current DEVEL code as BETA4 and then RC1, RC2, ... > in two weeks periods and release 1.0. Ok, I'm good with that. We need to fix the TBrowse before we get to RC1. No other changes. Code Freeze, all branches

Re: [Harbour] Next Beta

On Saturday 15 December 2007 02:35:03 am Pritpal Bedi wrote: > Can you point out which need be fixed in Tbrowse. I had fixed a lot of > xHarbour Tbrowse years back. May be I can help. I don't have the specifics. Can someone here provide the bug list for tbrowse? __

Re: [Harbour] Harbour Trucante 10chars variables/function/fileds names

On Tuesday 18 December 2007 01:46:01 am Massimo Renzi (MaticaSrl) wrote: > Hi all. > I'm try to convert a big clipper 5.2 project. > I see exist a lot of errors in the code cause developers often have used > name longer than 10chars. > Clipper compiler ignore the char in more of 10, > Exist an Harb

Re: R: [Harbour] Harbour Trucante 10chars variables/function/fileds names

On Tuesday 18 December 2007 02:01:59 am Massimo Renzi (MaticaSrl) wrote: > Hi Phil, > thank you very much for your reply. > What is "Click!" and where I can find it? > Thank you. > Massimo I was looking at Click! and I don't see that it specifically does that, however it comes with source code an

Re: [Harbour] Re: Harbour under OS/2 - eCS

On Thursday 20 December 2007 02:36:20 am David Arturo Macias Corona wrote: > But I suggest to release beta 4 until January, because many people are > on vacations, traveling, disconnected, ... The critical part of our beta release cycle is not what date we release it but what date we call it a r

Re: R: [Harbour] Harbour Trucante 10chars variables/function/fileds names

On Thursday 20 December 2007 06:46:34 am Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Phil Barnett wrote: > > I was looking at Click! and I don't see that it specifically does that, > > however it comes with source code and it would be trivial to make it > > truncate

Re: [Harbour] Harbour running on the iPhone!

On Wednesday 02 January 2008 08:23:41 pm Antonio Linares wrote: > http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/8962/iphone038tw6.png Bravo! ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour

Re: [Harbour] Licence question

On Wednesday 23 January 2008 01:56:31 am Alexander S.Kresin wrote: > Hi All, > > I do some work, which I plan to upload to Sourceforge as a new project > with the same licence as Harbour. > It includes, among other things, code from hbinet.c and net.c - I was > need to rework them for purposes

Re: [Harbour] Licence question

On Wednesday 23 January 2008 02:28:54 am Alexander S.Kresin wrote: > Phil Barnett пишет: > > You cannot remove their copyright from the files. > > Just to be clear: I don't want to infringe their interests in any way :). > If I include those files with my modifications

[Harbour] Next Beta Release

Przemek, Are we ready to do another beta release? Thanks. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour

Re: [Harbour] Re: Next Beta Release

On Thursday 24 January 2008 05:37:17 am Alexander S.Kresin wrote: > Phil Barnett writes: > > Przemek, > > > > Are we ready to do another beta release? > > Why Beta, Phil ? > It has no a big importance for me how the current version is called, > simply I do

Re: [Harbour] Next Beta Release

On Thursday 24 January 2008 09:46:06 pm Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > I think so. And probably it should be called rc-1. > The open question is what to do with beta branch. > After Viktor's cleanup in devel code (mostly in > contrib) the diff file between branches has over > 10MB. I can sync it but

Re: [Harbour] Next Beta Release

On Friday 25 January 2008 02:07:16 am Phil Barnett wrote: > On Thursday 24 January 2008 09:46:06 pm Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > > I think so. And probably it should be called rc-1. > > The open question is what to do with beta branch. > > After Viktor's cleanup in devel c

Re: [Harbour] Next Beta Release

On Friday 25 January 2008 02:26:36 am Lorenzo Fiorini wrote: > On Jan 25, 2008 8:18 AM, Phil Barnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Release Candidate means we are freezing the code until the release of > > 1.0. No new code. Period. > > Does this apply to contribs

Re: [Harbour] Next Beta Release

On Friday 25 January 2008 02:52:26 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Shall I do this renaming now? Yes. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour

Re: [Harbour] Small change in contrib/hbtip

On Friday 25 January 2008 06:35:13 am Lorenzo Fiorini wrote: > Before RC1 I'd like to upload this change: > > * contrib/hbtip/utils.c > > added *.ico mimetype support in TIP_MIMETYPE > > * contrib/hbtip/cgi.prg > + contrib/hbtip/sessid.prg > > moved static functions SID GenerateSID, CheckSID, Date

Re: [Harbour] Next Beta Release

On Friday 25 January 2008 09:49:31 am Mindaugas Kavaliauskas wrote: > Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > > I think so. And probably it should be called rc-1. > > The open question is what to do with beta branch. > > After Viktor's cleanup in devel code (mostly in > > contrib) the diff file between branche

Re: [Harbour] DIRECTOY and subfolders?

On Saturday 26 January 2008 07:12:21 pm Jorge A. Giraldo wrote: > Look for tree.zip in the oasis: > > http://www.the-oasis.net/ftpmaster.php3?content=ftpgenrl.htm > > Thanks Phil :-) It is truly amazing how that site continues to live on. You would not believe the traffic it still gets to this da

Re: [Harbour] rdddbt lib question

On Thursday 31 January 2008 08:13:01 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Hi Przemek and all, > > I've noticed this RDD doesn't get built > either using the GNU and non-GNU make system. > Yet the source directory is there in SVN. > > Should we add it to the make systems, or should > we rather remove the sour

Re: [Harbour] What about stopping the release process?

On Friday 08 February 2008 10:48:58 am Lorenzo Fiorini wrote: > It seems not the right moment to take decisions about 1.0 RC1. > > I suggest to reopen the tree for development, wait and see... No, we need to release a build. If we don't this thing will never get done. Why should we not finish Har

Re: [Harbour] What about stopping the release process?

On Saturday 09 February 2008 12:08:39 am Lorenzo Fiorini wrote: > So since it's unlike we'll have a 1.1 I think we should at least leave > the lib names as they have been in the last 8 years and do a favor to > poor users. Is the repository in an unusable state? -- "Sometimes I wonder whether t

Re: [Harbour] What about stopping the release process?

On Saturday 09 February 2008 05:17:12 am Lorenzo Fiorini wrote: > On Feb 9, 2008 7:33 AM, Phil Barnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is the repository in an unusable state? > > Is this the only parameter to consider? > > Do you really find a change like this between

Re: [Harbour] What about stopping the release process?

On Saturday 09 February 2008 06:31:11 am Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > Anyhow I do > not want to be master of release process. I can create binaries > for some platforms when we will be ready but I do not want to > decide about terms, create SVN tags, etc. I believe that we will > find someone who ca

[Harbour] Project Code Freeze

Just a note to remind everyone that we are in a code freeze and only code for bug fixes can be checked in at this time. All feature changes must wait until after the beta release. Thanks. -- "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbecil

[Harbour] Time for a release?

Przemek. The list traffic seems to have died down. I think this would be an appropriate time for a release. Your thoughts? -- "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain

Re: [Harbour] Time for a release?

On Tuesday 04 March 2008 01:34:05 am Alex Strickland wrote: > If this is a v1.0 release I would prefer that such a basic function be > correct. It is not. This will be beta 4 or rc1. -- "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who

Re: [Harbour] Time for a release?

On Tuesday 04 March 2008 05:51:53 am Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > On Mon, 03 Mar 2008, Mindaugas Kavaliauskas wrote: > > Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > > >but I do not know if it's good idea to touch such important function > > >just before release. Your opinion? > > > > Hi, > > I would prefer release

Re: [Harbour] RDD's for 16bit

On Thursday 06 March 2008 06:14:51 am Alex Strickland wrote: > To all > > Is there conceptually/technically/legally any impediment to compiling > the CDX RDD to be used with Clipper (16bit obviously)? > > I ask because I would like to implement encryption and I still have a > large part of my appli

Re: [Harbour] RDD's for 16bit

On Thursday 06 March 2008 11:22:00 am J. Lefebvre wrote: > I don't think Alex would like to redistribute the RDD by itself. If I > correctly understand, he would like to use this RDD to compile some "End > Users" programs, but from the Clipper Compiler instead of Harbour. So I > thinks there is no

Re: [Harbour] 2008-03-05 19:10 UTC+0100PrzemyslawCzerpak(druzus/at/priv.onet.pl)

On Sunday 09 March 2008 05:30:31 pm Massimo Belgrano wrote: > mbelgrano Done -- "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour

Re: [Harbour] How import mailing zipped archive

On Monday 10 March 2008 06:36:21 am Massimo Belgrano wrote: > How import in out look the mailing zipped archive > http://lists.harbour-project.org/pipermail/harbour/ I don't think outlook supports mbox files. -- "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting

Re: [Harbour] What about the release?

On Monday 17 March 2008 01:37:04 pm Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Lorenzo Fiorini wrote: > > What are we waiting for? > > For someone who will make it ;-) I was waiting for your go ahead. I can do it at any time. -- "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart p

Re: [Harbour] What about the release?

On Tuesday 18 March 2008 09:05:18 am Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Phil Barnett wrote: > > I was waiting for your go ahead. I can do it at any time. > > I'm really sorry, I have to missed it. > Please do it. Ok, I think I'll have time tomorrow night

Re: [Harbour] What about the release?

On Tuesday 25 March 2008 07:13:46 am Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Phil Barnett wrote: > > > > I was waiting for your go ahead. I can do it at any time. > > > > > > I'm really sorry, I have to missed it. > > > Please do it. &g

Re: [Harbour] What about creating a harbour user group on usenet?

On Wednesday 26 March 2008 02:47:13 pm Rodrigo Miguel wrote: > I've to agree, the developer mailing list is not the most easy thing in the > world for a new user or normal developer to get in contact with harbour dev > team. Usenet is more democratic way to do that, but I don't know if get a > new

Re: [Harbour] What about the release?

On Monday 31 March 2008 08:09:18 am Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008, Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > > > Can someone work on the what's new? Just a recap of the big things > > > would be great. > > > > I'll try in this weekend. > > Phil, I'm really sorry but it will have to wait for nex

[Harbour] Mail Server Backup

Over the weekend we got spam bombed. The inbound mail queue was deleted with 600k entries. If you have sent something to the mail list and it hasn't shown up, send it again. It was probably lost in the storm. Thanks. -- In order to ensure a safe police state; the right of the people to keep a

Re: [Harbour] Harbour web site

On Tuesday 22 April 2008 06:10:48 am Massimo Belgrano wrote: > Is possible a revised version of http://www.harbour-project.org/? > Some part seem obsolete http://culikr.sites.uol.com.br/functions.htm > Look and feel a little outdated > Is possible a cooperation for having better website? > I can gi

Re: [Harbour] Status of next release

On Monday 28 April 2008 12:20:19 pm Randy Portnoff wrote: > Hi all, > > What is the status of the next release? Also, will it be B4 or R1? RC1, and we are needing the whatsnew.txt file before we mark the repository. -- In order to ensure a safe police state; the right of the people to keep and

[Harbour] Reminder

This is a reminder that we are in feature lockdown at this time and are ready to release the first release candidate for Harbour Project 1.0. I will mark the files for RC1 as soon as we have a what's new file. And that is a big undertaking. I just don't want us to lose sight of why we are not at

Re: [Harbour] Harbour web site

On Wednesday 14 May 2008 12:41:57 pm Massimo Belgrano wrote: > >> Is possible a revised version of http://www.harbour-project.org/? > >> Some part seem obsolete http://culikr.sites.uol.com.br/functions.htm > >> Look and feel a little outdated > >> Is possible a cooperation for having better website

Re: [Harbour] CHANGELOG: 2008-05-19 16:30 UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats (harbour.01 syenar hu)

On Monday 19 May 2008 12:57:05 pm Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote: > In this weekend I finally finished the whatsnew.txt > I'm attaching it. Now I would like to ask some English native > speakers to fix it and of course everyone to add all things > I missed. > > best regards, > Przemek Monumental work,

[Harbour] Release Time

I know I promised to make the release mark last weekend, but things got in the way and this is the first time I've even gotten back to read the list's email. Wow, what a huge effort on bug fixing. I'm glad this all made it into the release candidate. Please let me know if the bug fixes are all

Re: [Harbour] Release Time

On Monday 02 June 2008 01:05:15 pm Massimo Belgrano wrote: > What about new harbour's web site and fidonet group? What about it? I thought fidonet died about 15 years ago... -- Waiting for sunspots. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org

Re: [Harbour] HB_TRACE and MT

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 07:04:01 am Lorenzo Fiorini wrote: > I agree that we need stable releases ( also more frequents, last was > almost a year ago ) > but I can't understand why "wasting" and event like 1.0 with a simply > "stable release". > > If we agree that the releases are for the "mass", t

Re: [Harbour] Release Time

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 12:15:20 pm Massimo Belgrano wrote: > I think usenet when write fidonet > > What about new harbour's web site and fidonet group? What about it? -- Waiting for sunspots. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http:

Re: [Harbour] Release Time

On Sunday 01 June 2008 11:00:58 pm Phil Barnett wrote: > I know I promised to make the release mark last weekend, but things got in > the way and this is the first time I've even gotten back to read the list's > email. Wow, what a huge effort on bug fixing. I'm glad thi

[Harbour] harbour-RC1 tag is in place.

I updated the following files Sending[harbour]/ChangeLog Sending[harbour]/doc/whatsnew.txt Sending[harbour]/harbour.spec Sending[harbour]/include/hbver.h Transmitting file data Committed revision 8597. I have no idea how or how long the version has been at 1.1

Re: [Harbour] Release Time

On Wednesday 04 June 2008 05:28:41 am Massimo Belgrano wrote: > Do you plan open a fidonet group or something similar for user group ? > Is possible after new release having something of news in webside? We can reopen the mailing list harbour-users. -- Waiting for sunspots. _

Re: [Harbour] harbour-RC1 tag is in place.

On Wednesday 04 June 2008 02:45:33 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Hi Phil, > > Many thanks. > > I wonder if we should rather have a 'harbour-1.0.0' > (or similar, with an agreed version number), and we > should simply release RC1 -> RC2 -> RCn by doing > updates inside this one branch, rather than havi

Re: [Harbour] Release Time

On Wednesday 04 June 2008 08:44:44 am Massimo Belgrano wrote: > Where? I think the obvious place would be [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Waiting for sunspots. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/

[Harbour] 2008-06-05 12:50 UTC-0400 Phil Barnett

2008-06-05 12:50 UTC-0400 Phil Barnett * Set version in harbour.spec to 1.0.0-RC1 * Set version in include/hbver.h to 1.0.0-RC1 -- Waiting for sunspots. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman

Re: (To Phil) Re: [Harbour] harbour source snapshot size

On Thursday 05 June 2008 02:23:44 pm Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Could you modify the snapshot scripts to use "svn export " > rather than "svn checkout " to download the source tree? > > The "export"-ed source size is currently 5.5MB as .tar.bz2 and > 8.8MB as .zip, which is much smaller, as all .svn

[Harbour] RC1 Reminder

Just a reminder that we are working on releasing the 1.0.0 version of Harbour Project. At this time, we are not accepting code for anything except bug fixes. All feature enhancements must wait until after we release the 1.0.0 version to the world. We are actively soliciting feedback on bugs at

[Harbour] Harbour-Users mailing list has been created.

Someone needs to update the web site with this address, and remove the Harbour-Talk references. http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour-users Massimo, I believe you are the only one with passwords to edit the web site. -- Waiting for sunspots.

Re: [Harbour] Harbour-Users mailing list has been created.

On Saturday 07 June 2008 04:26:23 am Massimo Belgrano wrote: > Where is web site ? > ftp://ftp.harbour-project.org/Httpdocs This one is the current site. > ftp://ftp.harbour-project.org/httpdocs2008 This is a copy of the above httpdocs site so if something goes wrong, we can find the old implem

Re: [Harbour] Harbour-Users mailing list has been created.

On Saturday 07 June 2008 05:45:26 am Massimo Belgrano wrote: > Imo is not a good mailing for harbour user list because: > -not permit attached Not true. There is a limit of 40k > -not aivable as nntp newsgroups distribute messages. Email distribute messages. There is very little difference. Exc

[Harbour] SVN Backup

It's much smaller now. MUCH MUCH smaller. I deleted the checkout directory and ran it. That got rid of the extra stuff. -- Waiting for sunspots. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harb

Re: [Harbour] SVN Backup

On Monday 09 June 2008 01:44:49 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Thanks Phil. > > I think the checkout dir should be deleted > before each process to not leave there files > already deleted from the repository. I don't think I want to do this each time since it pulls a lot of traffic this way. How abou

[Harbour] RC1 Status

Don't forget that we are in bug fixing and cleanup mode only. I will tag RC2 next weekend. If we go a week with few fixes, I will release 1.0.0. -- Waiting for sunspots. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project

[Harbour] Fwd: Uncaught bounce notification

Newsgroups and mail lists accomplish EXACTLY the same goals. Information sharing. There is nothing about newsgroups that make this better. In fact, newsgroups get distributed wastefully to places that will never use them, taking up internet bandwidth with nothing to show for it. Kinda like spam.

Re: [Harbour] Fwd: Uncaught bounce notification

On Tuesday 10 June 2008 03:48:57 am Massimo Belgrano wrote: > In newsgroup managed by xharbour are present 1-3 spam messages each > month > http://groups.google.it/group/comp.lang.xharbour/topics > so spam in not a problem in my opinion > > Think that if you have stored all your messages in a newsg

Re: [Harbour] Mail archive frenzy

On Tuesday 10 June 2008 05:58:55 pm Szakáts Viktor wrote: > May I suggest to choose one archival system and stick > to it? I'd suggest to keep the native archive on > lists.harbour-project.org, which is BTW also indexed > by google. I don't have a problem with lots of external archiving. We didn'

Re: [Harbour] RE: Harbour Digest, Vol 20, Issue 77

On Thursday 12 June 2008 09:51:10 am Massimo Belgrano wrote: > Is the name of this post > And I don't understand because i > I don't know a digest regarding harbour so I am curios When you subscribe to this list, you have a choice of getting each message as it is mailed, or having them all batche

Re: R: R: [Harbour] GT- Multi-platform Messaging Interface

On Sunday 15 June 2008 07:54:59 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > There are a lot more to be discussed, like > "modal"/"non-modal", routing inputs, how to solve > everything above if we don't have a "base" window > (should we support this at all in the first round), I would think not. -- Waiting for su

Re: [Harbour] Re: Possible copyright violation

On Tuesday 17 June 2008 10:52:53 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Just an idea, but maybe it'd be better to include > these from the WINE/MINGW distribution (after ensuring > that their license allows it) Thanks for finding this. If we can find these files under better licensing we can keep them, or we

Re: [Harbour] hbwhat32 & copyrights

On Wednesday 18 June 2008 04:19:36 pm Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Unless of course someone confirms that MS copyrighted files > in our repository are okay. No, definitely not OK. -- Waiting for sunspots. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.or

Re: [Harbour] And binaries ?

On Friday 20 June 2008 04:44:43 am David Arturo Macias Corona wrote: > Now we have Harbour-RC1 tag, but not binaries > > They will be created/released ? We will tag RC2 tomorrow unless we decide that there were no bugs in RC1. Viktor, You have made some changes to the rtl this week and I believe

Re: [Harbour] And binaries ?

On Friday 20 June 2008 09:22:08 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Well, is there anybody volunteering to create binaries? Might as well tag RC2 and build them. There are hundreds of changes from RC1. -- Waiting for sunspots. ___ Harbour mailing list Harbour@h

Re: [Harbour] And binaries ?

On Friday 20 June 2008 10:08:20 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Hi Phil, > > Can you please name it harbour-0.9.9RC2? > > Also, is there any way to rename the current > one from harbour-RC1 to harbour-0.9.9RC1? This is the release candidate for 1.0.0, thus it is named 1.0.0 RCn This is how most projec

Re: [Harbour] Repository and sf.net changes

On Saturday 21 June 2008 04:08:12 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > - SVN: Renamed /trunk/harbour-RC1 -> /trunk/harbour0.9.9RC1 This is wrong. We are working on the release candidate for 1.0.0 and should be named that. -- Waiting for sunspots. ___ Harbour ma

Re: [Harbour] Group opinion on RC2 from RC1 or main branch?

On Monday 23 June 2008 04:31:12 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Hi all, > > Are there any opinions on whether to use > RC1 or the main branch as the source for RC2? > > I'd more and more vote to the main branch > as the source, as there has been too many > changes and fixes to be easy to merge. Well, i

Re: [Harbour] Group opinion on RC2 from RC1 or main branch?

On Tuesday 24 June 2008 02:11:30 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Same would have happened if we continue to work on RC1, > since in that case, we'd have to retrofit everything to > the main branch. Since it's parallel development. This just makes double work for everyone. Right now, we should be conce

Re: [Harbour] Group opinion on RC2 from RC1 or main branch?

On Tuesday 24 June 2008 03:05:44 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > (when will 1.0.0 be considered closes, how will we > release 1.0.1, how to copy/mark stuff on SVN..., > shall we rename 1.0.0RC1 to 1.0?) There may be multiple branches, but they need to be clearly defined on what can be done to them. L

Re: [Harbour] Group opinion on RC2 from RC1 or main branch?

On Tuesday 24 June 2008 04:11:47 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > Do you agree with such a branch layout and versioning?: No. > > + harbour              - commit all new developments > > |-+ harbour-1.0        - commit 1.0 fixes only ("1.0dev") > | +-- harbour-1.0.0RCn - read-only for RC release > | +-

Re: [Harbour] Group opinion on RC2 from RC1 or main branch?

On Tuesday 24 June 2008 04:29:09 am Szakáts Viktor wrote: > > Do you agree with such a branch layout and versioning?: > > > > + harbour - commit all new developments > > > > |-+ harbour-1.0- commit 1.0 fixes only ("1.0dev") > > | +-- harbour-1.0.0RCn - read-only for RC release

<    1   2   3   >