Re: New fvwm95 into unstable

1998-04-15 Thread Daniel Martin at cush
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Personally, I am inclined to think that if your release fixed > bugs, and introduced not too many new features, it should go > into frozen. And now it's just done that - 2.0.43b-4 is in incoming heading for frozen, but you probably saw that

Re: New fvwm95 into unstable

1998-04-13 Thread Anthony Fok
On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 03:54:37PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Personally, I am inclined to think that if your release fixed > bugs, and introduced not too many new features, it should go > into frozen. > > Secondly, new maintainers do not have a corner on errors and > bugs; an

Re: New fvwm95 into unstable

1998-04-13 Thread Manoj Srivastava
Hi, Personally, I am inclined to think that if your release fixed bugs, and introduced not too many new features, it should go into frozen. Secondly, new maintainers do not have a corner on errors and bugs; and I am of the opinion we treat people no different that what their a

Re: New fvwm95 into unstable

1998-04-13 Thread Daniel Martin at cush
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, > >>"Daniel" == Daniel Martin at cush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Daniel> I'd also recommend that people upgrading directly from bo > Daniel> upgrade to this package instead of the one in frozen, as this > Daniel> package's preinst cleans up

Re: New fvwm95 into unstable

1998-04-13 Thread Manoj Srivastava
Hi, >>"Daniel" == Daniel Martin at cush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Daniel> I'd also recommend that people upgrading directly from bo Daniel> upgrade to this package instead of the one in frozen, as this Daniel> package's preinst cleans up the old bo config. files (the name Daniel> of the config.