Pedro Ribeiro <pedrib@gmail.com> (03/04/2010): > Hi all, Hi, > However, as you are certainly aware the newer versions require KMS. hint: that might even be a reason for our keeping 2.11 in experimental. > This conflicts with the goals set a few months ago that KMS would be > shipped in Squeeze disabled. How do you plan to address this? At the moment, 2.9 means we can go for KMS as the default, while still allowing people to switch back to UMS, should they wish to do so. Not sure how the situation is going to evolve, though. > Please don't take my questions as an insult of some sort - I'm just > curious. I so feel like insulted. :D > PS: Please mail me directly, I'm not on the list! Done. Mraw, KiBi.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature