Re: fedora-legacy/Warren agrees to enforce rpm upgrades?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: fedora-legacy/Warren agrees to enforce rpm upgrades?
From: Warren Togami <warren@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 14:20:40 -1000
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0311081437550.2545@swampfox.owlriver.com>
References: <3FA229D3.4000104@togami.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0310310521120.29232@devel.capslock.lan> <3FA2722D.6090504@togami.com> <20031031180006.1b3cad50.ms-nospam-0306@arcor.de> <1067622953.20763.164.camel@bobcat.mine.nu> <1068204440.12684.29.camel@laptop> <20031107164717.GD27327@puariko.nirvana> <20031108122024.GI11801@puariko.nirvana> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0311081437550.2545@swampfox.owlriver.com>
Reply-to: fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: fedora-legacy-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx

On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 10:07, R P Herrold wrote:
> The recurrent re-appearance of the old 'there can be only one'
> autocratic methods and ill-considered 'snap decisions' by some

Russ, you are implying me, and I must respond.  There has NOT been any
of this in the Legacy discussions.  I can help to consider you as
trolling at this point.

Warren

References:
- fedora-legacy agrees to enforce rpm upgrades? (was: Warren's Package Naming Proposal - Revision 1)
  - From: Axel Thimm
- fedora-legacy/Warren agrees to enforce rpm upgrades?
  - From: Axel Thimm
- Re: fedora-legacy/Warren agrees to enforce rpm upgrades?
  - From: R P Herrold

Prev by Date: "the rpm question" - summary
Next by Date: Re: "the rpm question" - summary
Previous by thread: Re: "the rpm question" - summary
Next by thread: [Fwd: Re: fedora-legacy agrees to enforce rpm upgrades? (was: Warren's Package Naming Proposal - Revision 1)]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Fedora Development] [Fedora Announce] [Fedora Legacy Announce] [Fedora Config] [PAM] [Fedora General Discussion] [Big List of Linux Books] [Gimp] [Yosemite Questions]