2011.12.12 20:22 "[Tiff] considering packaging 4.0 beta in debian "unstable"", by Jay Berkenbilt
-
2011.12.12 20:33 "Re: [Tiff] considering packaging 4.0 beta in debian "unstable"", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2011.12.12 21:26 "Re: [Tiff] considering packaging 4.0 beta in debian "unstable"", by Jay Berkenbilt
-
2011.12.12 23:49 "Re: [Tiff] considering packaging 4.0 beta in debian "unstable"", by Chris Cox
-
2011.12.13 00:16 "Re: [Tiff] considering packaging 4.0 beta in debian "unstable"", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2011.12.13 00:29 "Re: [Tiff] considering packaging 4.0 beta in debian "unstable"", by Frank Warmerdam
-
2011.12.13 00:16 "Re: [Tiff] considering packaging 4.0 beta in debian "unstable"", by Bob Friesenhahn
2011.12.13 14:42 "Re: [Tiff] considering packaging 4.0 beta in debian "unstable"", by Olivier Paquet
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Lee Howard <faxguy@howardsilvan.com> wrote: > Thumbs-up from me, too, on 4.0.0 as-is. I've been using it on my
development system for about a year now, and I'm happy with it.
Same here. We've been shipping it with our software for two years and have only had a few minor issues which were fixed. I don't think there are any "absolutely must fix" problems holding up a 4.0.0 release at this point.
Olivier