Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
From: Nano Nano <40101.nospam@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 12:13:34 -0800
Message-id: <[🔎] 20040111201334.GA9398@comcast.net>
Mail-followup-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20040111195339.GI15281@erizo.shearer.org>
References: <[🔎] 20040111195339.GI15281@erizo.shearer.org>

On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 06:23:39AM +1030, Dan Shearer wrote:
> So what, in your opinion, are the technologies (or significant packages)
> which should be in Debian but are not? And why do you think they are
> not?

This probably won't make a "Top 5", but: Fluxbox 0.9.x

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
  - From: Marc Wilson <msw@cox.net>

References:
- Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
  - From: Dan Shearer <dan@shearer.org>

Prev by Date: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
Next by Date: Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
Previous by thread: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
Next by thread: Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread