Re: xulrunner 1.9.2 into sid?
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:39:20PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Philipp Kern <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2010-06-28 11:55:22 CEST]:
> > On 2010-06-28, Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> wrote:
> > > If there is no manpower to do better than this then I feel that it would
> > > be more honest to just use volatile.
> > The catch-all for "I can't maintain this stuff properly" is not volatile,
> > but backports. Thanks.
> No it isn't, can you please stop disregarding backports in that way? If
> you don't like it that's your fault - but calling it a dump place for
> stuff that one can't maintain properly couldn't be further from reality.
It seems the irony was well hidden, then.
> >  No offence meant for the awesome mozilla maintainers.
> But offence meant for the backports maintainers? Thanks for the fish.
I already took the offence for the volatile maintainers, thanks.