On Jan 9, 2008 11:54 AM, Roman Kyrylych <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/1/9, bardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > 2008/1/9, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > Right. Let me rephrase that a little. I don't think they need
> > > explanations that would overflow that box, except for possible URL
>
2008/1/9, bardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 2008/1/9, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Right. Let me rephrase that a little. I don't think they need
> > explanations that would overflow that box, except for possible URL
> > runoff, but that's to be expected
>
> I think I'm with Karolina here, I re
2008/1/9, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Right. Let me rephrase that a little. I don't think they need
> explanations that would overflow that box, except for possible URL
> runoff, but that's to be expected
I think I'm with Karolina here, I remember I had the same impression a
couple of tim
On Jan 9, 2008 10:52 AM, Travis Willard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2008 11:37 AM, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Jan 9, 2008 3:50 AM, Karolina Lindqvist
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Is it possible to make the box for comment, in the flag package
> > > out-o
On Jan 9, 2008 11:37 AM, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2008 3:50 AM, Karolina Lindqvist
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is it possible to make the box for comment, in the flag package
> > out-of-date, a
> > little bit bigger? As it is now, it is hard to see what you write
On Jan 9, 2008 3:50 AM, Karolina Lindqvist
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it possible to make the box for comment, in the flag package out-of-date, a
> little bit bigger? As it is now, it is hard to see what you write, if you
> want to explain your findings.
Erm, I don't think you should really n
Is it possible to make the box for comment, in the flag package out-of-date, a
little bit bigger? As it is now, it is hard to see what you write, if you
want to explain your findings.
7 matches
Mail list logo