* Ingo Juergensmann (ij@2004.bluespice.org) wrote: > > So fold this stuff into the buildd.d.o code > > Why? I don't see any reasoning for that. If you prefer buildd.d.o over > buildd.net, then get happy with buildd.d.o. All information is already > there. If you like buildd.net then visit buildd.net again. It's my understanding that you aren't willing to provide the code for buildd.net so that the same functionality can be incorporated into buildd.d.o. If that's the case then it's unfortunate but also shows that the problems are not just one-sided here. Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature