On Tue May 01 13:20, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
>
> --- Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
>
> > On Tue May 01 12:50, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
>
> > well, we're shipping a load of png files as it is, I'm not sure that
> > amanith instead is much of a lose. I also don't buy 'less dependencies'
> > a
--- Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> On Tue May 01 12:50, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> well, we're shipping a load of png files as it is, I'm not sure that
> amanith instead is much of a lose. I also don't buy 'less dependencies'
> as a reason---users don't have to care about that, apt do
On Tue May 01 12:50, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
>
> --- Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
>
> > Probably, but it will be more work. I don't see any real reason why if
> > amanith is packaged we shouldn't use it all the time.
>
> To give users the option. Less dependencies, lighter install. A
--- Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> Probably, but it will be more work. I don't see any real reason why if
> amanith is packaged we shouldn't use it all the time.
To give users the option. Less dependencies, lighter install. Also being able
to give upstream a optimal patch. Is it
On Tue May 01 12:01, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> I seriously doubt it, but we might try. In any case we should have a
> preplacement available, even if it's a different one than the original. Maybe
> it would be wise to give upstream an option to have a say in the decision too?
Sure
> I still expect tha
--- Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> On Mon Apr 30 21:02, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> >
> > --- Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> >
> > > Wanting to play with the new version I started doing the dfsg packaging.
> > > I've hence updated the version number in the changelog t
On Mon Apr 30 21:02, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
>
> --- Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
>
> > Wanting to play with the new version I started doing the dfsg packaging.
> > I've hence updated the version number in the changelog to be .dfsg and
> > updated the get-orig-source rule in debian/ru
--- Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> Wanting to play with the new version I started doing the dfsg packaging.
> I've hence updated the version number in the changelog to be .dfsg and
> updated the get-orig-source rule in debian/rules to remove all the songs
> we can't distribute. M
Wanting to play with the new version I started doing the dfsg packaging.
I've hence updated the version number in the changelog to be .dfsg and
updated the get-orig-source rule in debian/rules to remove all the songs
we can't distribute. Miry, any update on suitable fonts?
On a similar note, does
9 matches
Mail list logo
