Re: 1.2.0 blockers

2002-02-06 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 02:04:54PM +, John Levon wrote: > a crash can happen without the patch. In what way is this not a critical bug ? This is not clear from the bug description. Andre' -- André Pönitz .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: 1.2.0 blockers

2002-02-06 Thread John Levon
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 03:11:18PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > John> a crash can happen without the patch. In what way is this not a > John> critical bug ? > > What about discussing and applying the patch? Is the crash fixed with > the patch? You'd have to ask Michael to test it - it's

Re: 1.2.0 blockers

2002-02-06 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 01:15:18PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes John> wrote: >> | I believe 'cri' for #143 is too harsh. >> >> agree. John> a crash can happen without the patch. In what way is this not a John> critical bug ? What about

Re: 1.2.0 blockers

2002-02-06 Thread John Levon
On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 01:15:18PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | I believe 'cri' for #143 is too harsh. > > agree. a crash can happen without the patch. In what way is this not a critical bug ? john -- "Mathemeticians stand on each other's shoulders while computer scientists stand o

Re: 1.2.0 blockers

2002-02-06 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Lars> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | I believe 'cri' for Lars> #143 is too harsh. Lars> agree. And what about the patch? Basically, it looks good to me, although getFontSettings should be renamed to something else. It