-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Jan 30, 2009, at 12:53 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: >> 1. Barry, who is the release manager for 3.0.1, does not like the >> idea >> of the cruft that is being proposed removed from 3.0.1. > > I don't think he actually said that (in fact, I think he said the > opposite). It would be good if he clarified, though. To clarify: cruft that should have been removed 3.0 is fine to remove for 3.0.1, for some definition of "should have been". Barry -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSYMkxXEjvBPtnXfVAQIqtgP+Mra/z5nLY5SU56cw0JjgBwCVY1N3060K TSG90E4R+JpCsXRD7sjf2UfSAzKAGKz6gYja3hnt5awzhnCJMacgN0tvXNaAmuYi b7Qb6N4oV3izDGZPl3x0EO3DGimov2Nq8hCsEZbYnNd3U62MwRlzpW+FJbFJlZHO VR1jiVWX8Ig= =p0VE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4