Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
Which will mean that people will skip at least one distribution if we
released each 6 months, even two. That would put the burden on us of
needing to have security support for even 2 more distributions older
than current stable, which could not be possible.
ACK to t
Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo schreef:
El jue, 06-01-2005 a las 13:43 -0800, Will Lowe escribiÃ:
Is that really true? I would love to run "apt-get dist-upgrade" every
half a year. Currently it doesn't get me much. :) Now, for production
systems, don't you do some testing *before* you upgrade the OS?
Su
On 10-Jan-05, 16:47 (CST), Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the other hand -- we need to decide whether we want time-based
> releases. Other projects have had great successes with them, but they
> might not be right for Debian.
Of course, those other projects don't have worry abou
Patrzę w ekran, a to William Ballard pisze do mnie:
> .1 Releases aren't for adding functionality which was created after
> the .0 release. It's for finishing the stuff you postponed doing
> so you could ship.
So why is the Sarge to be 3.1? I think that it differs so much from Woody
(take only t
* "Marcelo E. Magallon"
| Are you thinking of say, the installer? I certainly *hope* that the
| installer is going to stay in the current status for at least another
| release! Another "whoos, let us restart from scratch" won't be
| welcome by anyone. And my hope is based on the fact that t
Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Re: Paul van der Vlis in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> You will understand that my most important point is security-support.
> >
> > ...which Debian provides for its stable distribution at any time, even
> > if the last stable release was ages ago.
>
> Where is the security su
Hi,
On Saturday 08 January 2005 07:45, Christian Perrier wrote:
> So, if we imagine we release sarge at February 1st (ahah), just
> immediately announce that etch will enter the first freeze stages
> (base packages frozen, testing-security checked, d-i frozen) on August
> 1st.
>
> This will give a
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 08:22:47PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> Thing> has a release cycle that's not compatible with a 6 month release
> period"? Say GNOME or KDE? Well, gets in the next
> release. So simple. We are known for missing upstream releases by a
> hair (sarge is almost c
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:46:00PM -0500, William Ballard wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 08:22:47PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > We don't have to go from X.0 to (X+1).0 in 6 months. It's
> > perfectly ok to go from X.0 to X.1.
>
> .1 Releases aren't for adding functionality whic
* Thomas Zimmerman:
> Is that really true? I would love to run "apt-get dist-upgrade" every
> half a year. Currently it doesn't get me much. :) Now, for production
> systems, don't you do some testing *before* you upgrade the OS?
Testing costs time and therefore money. Debian's secret corporat
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 08:22:47PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> We don't have to go from X.0 to (X+1).0 in 6 months. It's perfectly ok
> to go from X.0 to X.1.
.1 Releases aren't for adding functionality which was created after
the .0 release. It's for finishing the stuff you postponed
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:50:04AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Yes, I don't think the release team has any intention of working
> itself ragged to get a second release out 6 months after sarge. I
> also don't think there's any consensus among developers (or users)
> that we *want* to relea
> A 6-month period honestly doesn't allow us much time for new development
> anyway. If all we wanted was a point release of sarge, that'd be fine; but
> I think most people would like to see etch be an improvement over sarge in
> more respects than just hardware driver count, and we have to be re
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 00:50:04 -0800, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Yes, I don't think the release team has any intention of working itself
>ragged to get a second release out 6 months after sarge. I also don't think
>there's any consensus among developers (or users) that we *want* to re
El vie, 07-01-2005 a las 20:34 +1000, Anthony Towns escribiÃ:
> Someone should patch Thunderbird so it handles M-F-T:. Grump.
>
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >>Packages qualify to be enter prestable after residing in testing for
> >>ten days and having NO RC BUGS. The idea is to keep prestable in a
>
El jue, 06-01-2005 a las 13:43 -0800, Will Lowe escribiÃ:
> > Is that really true? I would love to run "apt-get dist-upgrade" every
> > half a year. Currently it doesn't get me much. :) Now, for production
> > systems, don't you do some testing *before* you upgrade the OS?
>
> Sure I do. But I
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:06:20AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:31:41 +1100, Andrew Pollock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >That said, this (rather large) blocker shouldn't be the issue it has been
> >for this release for the next one. The two biggest blockers to releasing any
>
Someone should patch Thunderbird so it handles M-F-T:. Grump.
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Packages qualify to be enter prestable after residing in testing for
ten days and having NO RC BUGS. The idea is to keep prestable in a
highly stable state at all times, a rolling stable if you will.
That's how tes
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 08:08:05PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 03:34:20PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time
> > > it takes for a new stable version.
> > > What about saying something like: the n
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 10:00:32 +0100, Jan Niehusmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good point. But that problem can be solved by some program checking that
> all installed packages are actually available from the selected
> distribution(s).
>
> That could be integrated into apt (e.g. apt-get upgrade w
> Is that really true? I would love to run "apt-get dist-upgrade" every
> half a year. Currently it doesn't get me much. :) Now, for production
> systems, don't you do some testing *before* you upgrade the OS?
Sure I do. But I run a production environment with several hundred
machines in it. W
Marc Sherman wrote:
> Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> >
> >That makes me wonder. I know that there are tools like cron-apt that
> >will perform apt-related tasks through cron jobs. Is there a way to
> >make it (or another tool) download the changelogs and email you any
> >new ones?
>
> I just filed a
Ken Bloom([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-05 09:10:
.
> There's a discussion of release proposals ongoing at
> http://wiki.debian.net/?ReleaseProposals
> Please look around there to see what's going on and understand the ideas
> that have been proposed.
Thanks for the pointer ... reading thro
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:51:21AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> That would leave testing users who happen to have such a package
> installed alone because they wouldn't notice their package vanishing
> from the mirrors, continuing to use a potentially vulnerable package.
Good point. But that problem
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 14:31:06 +0100, Bas Zoetekouw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>You wrote:
>> ahh .. I take your point. What about the idea of identifying a list of
>> release essential (RE) packages?
>
>I like that idea. We could even have a system to automagically throw
>buggy non-RE packages out o
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 14:18:37 +0100, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>* Joey Hess:
>> I think we've taken this "security bugs arn't fixed in testing as well
>> as in stable" thing as gospel a little too long without verifying it
>> lately. I've been checking and if testing is lagging stabl
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:31:41 +1100, Andrew Pollock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That said, this (rather large) blocker shouldn't be the issue it has been
>for this release for the next one. The two biggest blockers to releasing any
>time soon have been the installer and the security infrastructure. I
On 05-Jan 09:30, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> El mié, 05-01-2005 a las 04:16 -0800, Stephen Birch escribió:
> > Paul van der Vlis([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-04 14:40:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
> > > takes for a new stable ve
On 04-Jan 09:45, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 04-Jan-05, 07:40 (CST), Paul van der Vlis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
> > takes for a new stable version.
>
> If you want Ubuntu or Progeny, you know where[1] to find them. :-)
>
On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 20:25 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> Marcelo
>
> [0] Besides learning that there is still people in this world who seem
> to think that feminism is actually a solution to something. I am
> still amazed by that one.
Not trying to start a subthread, but prob
El miÃ, 05-01-2005 a las 23:13 +, Matthew Garrett escribiÃ:
> Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I agree with you on this. People using stable can not cope with
> > upgrades each 6 months or so.
>
> The issue isn't the frequency of new stable releases - the issue is how
Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree with you on this. People using stable can not cope with
> upgrades each 6 months or so.
The issue isn't the frequency of new stable releases - the issue is how
long a given stable release will be supported for. Releasing every 6
months
El miÃ, 05-01-2005 a las 04:16 -0800, Stephen Birch escribiÃ:
> Paul van der Vlis([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-04 14:40:
> > Hello,
> >
> > One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
> > takes for a new stable version.
>
> I guess one man's meat is another man's poison.
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 02:18:37PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Joey Hess:
> > I think we've taken this "security bugs arn't fixed in testing as well
> > as in stable" thing as gospel a little too long without verifying it
> > lately. I've been checking and if testing is lagging stable at all,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 06:07:41AM -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-05 14:22:
> > You should ask the release managers about that.
> Wow!! You mean the decision process is not made public? I would have
> thought it would be out in the open for all to see.
H
Florian Weimer wrote:
> I think that's because of the pending release, in particular frozen
> base packages, and not representative for the whole release cycle.
There's some truth to that, but of course many of our worst dependency
knots do not involve base packages.
--
see shy jo
signature.as
Quoting Robert Lemmen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 12:30:52PM -0500, Marc Sherman wrote:
> > >That makes me wonder. I know that there are tools like cron-apt that
> > >will perform apt-related tasks through cron jobs. Is there a way to
> > >make it (or another tool) download th
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 12:30:52PM -0500, Marc Sherman wrote:
> >That makes me wonder. I know that there are tools like cron-apt that
> >will perform apt-related tasks through cron jobs. Is there a way to
> >make it (or another tool) download the changelogs and email you any
> >new ones?
>
> I j
Roberto Sanchez wrote:
>
That makes me wonder. I know that there are tools like cron-apt that
will perform apt-related tasks through cron jobs. Is there a way to
make it (or another tool) download the changelogs and email you any
new ones?
I just filed a wishlist on cron-apt about that same thing
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 04:16:49 -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Paul van der Vlis([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-04 14:40:
>> Hello,
>>
>> One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
>> takes for a new stable version.
>
> I guess one man's meat is another man's poison.
>
> Sinc
On Tuesday 04 January 2005 05:58 pm, Neil McGovern wrote:
> Recently, I did have a box rooted. This was due to a user running phpbb
> on the system, without me knowing, despite the policy of no software
> without clearance from me.
My I ask, how did the attacker get root? Did the user have root a
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 06:07:41AM -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-05 14:22:
> >
> > You should ask the release managers about that.
> >
>
> Wow!! You mean the decision process is not made public? I would have
> thought it would be out in the open for all t
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 08:11:44AM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
>
> OK, exactly what are YOU NOT DOING, now? Come on, I know you CAN'T be
> that busy. You only maintain a few trivial packages... come on you could
> NMU the kernel-source-2.[4|6] fixing all th issues.
No need to MMU. The debian-kern
Bas Zoetekouw([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-05 14:31:
>
> I like that idea. We could even have a system to automagically throw
> buggy non-RE packages out of testing.
>
That wouldn't be a bad idea at all. In the recent DPL interview:
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/12/23/2023223
Martin
Wouter Verhelst([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-05 14:22:
>
> You should ask the release managers about that.
>
Wow!! You mean the decision process is not made public? I would have
thought it would be out in the open for all to see.
Mind you, Debian seems to be a hotbed of emotion at times so perhaps
Hi Stephen!
You wrote:
> ahh .. I take your point. What about the idea of identifying a list of
> release essential (RE) packages?
I like that idea. We could even have a system to automagically throw
buggy non-RE packages out of testing.
--
Kind regards,
+-
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 05:12:57AM -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-05 13:46:
> > That's how testing started off. We stopped doing this because
> > a) it at one point stalled glibc; as a result, nothing moved to
> > testing
> >anymore, and when it finally
* Joey Hess:
> I think we've taken this "security bugs arn't fixed in testing as well
> as in stable" thing as gospel a little too long without verifying it
> lately. I've been checking and if testing is lagging stable at all, it's
> doing so by a much smaller amount than we've traditionally thoug
Wouter Verhelst([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-05 13:46:
> That's how testing started off. We stopped doing this because
> a) it at one point stalled glibc; as a result, nothing moved to
> testing
>anymore, and when it finally did, the changes were so dramatic
>that
>testing was broken for
On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 10:45 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jan 04, Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It shouldn't be forgotten that the biggest blocker after these things is
> > probably a general failure to actually care all that much. How many
> > people are actually behaving as
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 04:16:49AM -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Perhaps a date based release mechanism could be built using a new
> distribution, call it prestable.
>
> Packages qualify to be enter prestable after residing in testing for
> ten days and having NO RC BUGS. The idea is to keep prest
Paul van der Vlis([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-04 14:40:
> Hello,
>
> One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
> takes for a new stable version.
I guess one man's meat is another man's poison.
Since I administer a large number of distant computers I view the long
time
Jan Niehusmann wrote:
> Unfortunately, testing does not guarantee security updates.
Of course given the security+woody tagged RC bugs #237422, #246443,
#274225, #278625, #278942, #284031, #192732, #196590, #198567, #199351,
#202244, #223456, #244810, #244811, #250106, #260508, #260838, #268783,
#2
Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
[...]
[0] Besides learning that there is still people in this world who seem
to think that feminism is actually a solution to something. I am
still amazed by that one.
Thankyou for reminding us all, by demonstration, that the problems
feminism tries to solve
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Otto Wyss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Stopping releasing might be a good idea but there should be a better
>way. IMO the problem is the stable release isn't updated on a regulare
>basis. It might be a better idea to divide Debian into subsystems which
>could be relea
On Jan 04, Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It shouldn't be forgotten that the biggest blocker after these things is
> probably a general failure to actually care all that much. How many
> people are actually behaving as if a release is just around the corner?
A very simple way would b
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 06:54:51PM -0500, William Ballard wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 11:25:29PM +, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> > We've spent most of the past year thinking a release might be just round
> > the corner. We can only cry wolf so many times before the world stops
> > believing
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 11:25:29PM +, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> We've spent most of the past year thinking a release might be just
> round the corner. We can only cry wolf so many times before the world
> stops believing us and finds an option that actually works.
You ought to hear the j
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 03:34:20PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time
> > it takes for a new stable version.
> >
> > What about saying something like: the next stable release comes in
> > the beginning of 2006?
>
> The relea
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:35:37PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> It shouldn't be forgotten that the biggest blocker after these things
> is probably a general failure to actually care all that much. How
> many people are actually behaving as if a release is just around the
> corner? How can
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 03:41:41PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> ...which Debian provides for its stable distribution at any time,
> even if the last stable release was ages ago. How does a fixed
> release date help there?
Besides Florian's point, you have to consider that Debian needs peopl
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 07:45:12PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> >I subscribe to debian-security (+ d-s-announce) and get reports whenever
> >there's anything released.
> >I know what is installed on my boxes, so I know if this announcement
> >affects me.
> >
> You are probably in the minority, t
Neil McGovern wrote:
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:58:42PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would strongly caution against using Sarge for a production system
until there is security team support. See this message I posted to d-u
when someone pointed out that they were running sarge on some servers:
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 11:25:29PM +, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> We've spent most of the past year thinking a release might be just round
> the corner. We can only cry wolf so many times before the world stops
> believing us and finds an option that actually works.
I started using Linux (and D
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:35:37PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That said, this (rather large) blocker shouldn't be the issue it has
> > been for this release for the next one. The two biggest blockers to
> > releasing any time soon have been the ins
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:58:42PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I would strongly caution against using Sarge for a production system
> until there is security team support. See this message I posted to d-u
> when someone pointed out that they were running sarge on some servers:
>
> http:/
Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That said, this (rather large) blocker shouldn't be the issue it has been
> for this release for the next one. The two biggest blockers to releasing any
> time soon have been the installer and the security infrastructure. I'm
> actually not abreast of wh
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 04:25:00PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> > >At least that's been the case including sarge. Hence, such
> > >a sentence would not mean anything.
> > >
> > >>I can understand something like "Debian releases when it's ready", but
> > >>many people
On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 14:58 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Quoting Thomas Jollans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Well, you could argue that debian branches are not perfectly named but:
> > "stable" is best if you need *absolute* failsafety for critical jobs
> > "testing" is best if you want a stable s
Quoting Thomas Jollans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Paul van der Vlis wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
> > takes for a new stable version.
> >
> > What about saying something like: the next stable release comes in the
> > beginning of 2
[Mason Loring Bliss]
> Ooh... This is arguably the most exciting Debian-related thing I've
> heard of in some time! A security team for Sarge. Dreamy!
Thank you. But it is not for sarge. It is for testing. When sarge
is released, the team will move on to sarge+1. :)
Joey Hess is the coordinato
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 06:15:30PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > This may change with a testing-security upload queue.
>
> Yes. The testing security team might help here too.
> https://alioth.debian.org/projects/secure-testing/>.
Ooh... This is arguably the most exciting Debian-related
Tim Cutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Seriously. There's just no way you're going to change the way Debian
> > makes releases, or rather, doesn't. It's too big, and there are just
> > too damn many people involved, many of whom simply don't care about
> > releases. As long as we maintain our cu
On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 16:17 +0100, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> Martin Schulze schreef:
> > Paul van der Vlis wrote:
[...]
> > At least that's been the case including sarge. Hence, such
> > a sentence would not mean anything.
> >
> >>I can understand something like "Debian releases when it's ready"
[Jan Niehusmann]
> Unfortunately, testing does not guarantee security updates. Sure,
> one day the updates will promote from unstable to testing. But this
> can take a long time, if, for example, some dependencies block the
> new version from testing.
>
> This may change with a testing-security up
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 05:31:26PM +0100, Thomas Jollans wrote:
> stuff. If I needed something more production-ready, I'd use testing
> because you have (almost) garantee that the software will work and you
> will have security updates, too. (But not in the same quality as
Unfortunately, testin
Paul van der Vlis wrote:
Hello,
One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
takes for a new stable version.
What about saying something like: the next stable release comes in the
beginning of 2006?
I can understand something like "Debian releases when it's ready", but
On 4 Jan 2005, at 3:45 pm, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 04-Jan-05, 07:40 (CST), Paul van der Vlis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
takes for a new stable version.
If you want Ubuntu or Progeny, you know where[1] to find them. :-)
Serious
On 04-Jan-05, 07:40 (CST), Paul van der Vlis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
> takes for a new stable version.
If you want Ubuntu or Progeny, you know where[1] to find them. :-)
Seriously. There's just no way you're going to cha
Martin Schulze schreef:
Paul van der Vlis wrote:
At least that's been the case including sarge. Hence, such
a sentence would not mean anything.
I can understand something like "Debian releases when it's ready", but
many people have to work together. Maybe it's better to say: "a package
releases
Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> >At least that's been the case including sarge. Hence, such
> >a sentence would not mean anything.
> >
> >>I can understand something like "Debian releases when it's ready", but
> >>many people have to work together. Maybe it's better to say: "a package
> >>releases wh
Martin Schulze schreef:
Paul van der Vlis wrote:
Hello,
One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
takes for a new stable version.
What about saying something like: the next stable release comes in the
beginning of 2006?
The release date for a Debian release is not set
* Christoph Berg:
> Re: Paul van der Vlis in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> You will understand that my most important point is security-support.
>
> ...which Debian provides for its stable distribution at any time, even
> if the last stable release was ages ago.
Where is the security support for woody's
Re: Paul van der Vlis in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> You will understand that my most important point is security-support.
...which Debian provides for its stable distribution at any time, even
if the last stable release was ages ago. How does a fixed release date
help there?
Christoph
--
[EMAIL PROTE
Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
> takes for a new stable version.
>
> What about saying something like: the next stable release comes in the
> beginning of 2006?
The release date for a Debian release is not set by a ca
On Jan 04, Paul van der Vlis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about saying something like: the next stable release comes in the
> beginning of 2006?
Sure, here it is: "the next stable release comes in the beginning of
2006". Do you feel better now?
HTH, HAND.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
De
86 matches
Mail list logo
