Re: Some quotes about the issue at hand which should be consensual ... (Was: gtk 2.0.x or 2.9+ for etch g-i ?)

To: Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: debian-gtk-gnome@lists.debian.org, debian-release@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Some quotes about the issue at hand which should be consensual ... (Was: gtk 2.0.x or 2.9+ for etch g-i ?)
From: Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 16:51:37 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 20060516145137.GA3004@powerlinux.fr>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20060516115623.GA29883@powerlinux.fr>
References: <1147679595.7496.9.camel@localhost> <4468B4B2.4090700@tiscali.it> <20060515214015.GE2909@powerlinux.fr> <200605160734.27528.elendil@planet.nl> <[🔎] 20060516070946.GF18668@powerlinux.fr> <[🔎] 20060516115623.GA29883@powerlinux.fr>

On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 01:56:23PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Some thoughts by someone else than me about this issue :

Sorry to the gnome and release folk for not cutting out those two CCs.

Friendly,

Sven Luther

Reply to:

References:
- gtk 2.0.x or 2.9+ for etch g-i ? (Was: graphics or text as default)
  - From: Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>
- Some quotes about the issue at hand which should be consensual ... (Was: gtk 2.0.x or 2.9+ for etch g-i ?)
  - From: Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>

Prev by Date: Re: gtk 2.0.x or 2.9+ for etch g-i ? (Was: graphics or text as default)
Next by Date: Re: gtk 2.0.x or 2.9+ for etch g-i ? (Was: graphics or text as default)
Previous by thread: Some quotes about the issue at hand which should be consensual ... (Was: gtk 2.0.x or 2.9+ for etch g-i ?)
Next by thread: Re: gtk 2.0.x or 2.9+ for etch g-i ? (Was: graphics or text as default)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread