sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?

From: "Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergey AT optimaltec.com>
To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:40:12 -0400

Eric Sandall wrote:
>
> While that sounds nice for organization I think it just makes more work
> than is needed (a new grimoire, removing from devel -> stable, etc.).
> The packages themselves are free, as you mention.

I agree here.
Best,

Sergey.

[SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, seth, 04/22/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, Eric Sandall, 04/22/2006
  - Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 04/23/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, Mathieu L., 04/22/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, Arwed von Merkatz, 04/23/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 04/24/2006
  - Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, seth, 04/25/2006
    - Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 04/25/2006
      - Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 04/25/2006
      - Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, seth, 04/26/2006
        
        Re: [SM-Discuss] prometheus done -- plus, should we sequester/reject java spells?, Arwed von Merkatz, 04/26/2006