On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Mike Perry wrote:
> Thus spake Mike Perry (mikepe...@torproject.org):
>> Thus spake Nick Mathewson (ni...@freehaven.net):
>>
>> > Last year, I announced a tenative schedule for 0.2.3.x. We didn't
>> > stick to it, and things have gone a little pear-shaped with gett
Thus spake Mike Perry (mikepe...@torproject.org):
> Thus spake Nick Mathewson (ni...@freehaven.net):
>
> > Last year, I announced a tenative schedule for 0.2.3.x. We didn't
> > stick to it, and things have gone a little pear-shaped with getting
> > 0.2.3.x stabilized, but I think with a few twea
Thus spake Nick Mathewson (ni...@freehaven.net):
> Last year, I announced a tenative schedule for 0.2.3.x. We didn't
> stick to it, and things have gone a little pear-shaped with getting
> 0.2.3.x stabilized, but I think with a few tweaks we can use something
> similar to get a good schedule out
Minor typo noted.
-Paul
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 12:09:30PM -0400, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> Hi, all!
>
> Last year, I announced a tenative schedule for 0.2.3.x. We didn't
> stick to it, and things have gone a little pear-shaped with getting
> 0.2.3.x stabilized, but I think with a few tweaks we ca
Hi, all!
Last year, I announced a tenative schedule for 0.2.3.x. We didn't
stick to it, and things have gone a little pear-shaped with getting
0.2.3.x stabilized, but I think with a few tweaks we can use something
similar to get a good schedule out for 0.2.4.x.
My goals remain about what they we
Hello,
the current integration has a lot open issues and feature requests. [2]
Because there might come a proposal [1] to solve this cleanly, I created
an overview of all related open issues. [2] There are just so many
issues I though it makes sense to create an overview so nothing gets
forgotten
