Re: GWeather suckage

[Luis Villa <louie ximian com>]

On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 11:27, Kevin Vandersloot wrote:
> Hi Luis. Yah, it would have helped,

Ah, that's good to know. I wasn't sure if what you had intended for
weather.gnome.org would have still been messed up by 'upstream' problems
or not.

>  we just needed someone with time to
> set up weather.gnome.org ;) 

<nod> Will that need additional server resources as well? [I can't find
your original email on the subject, unfortunately, I may have
mis-archived it.]

> It's really just a problem with the server
> being down (and no way to contact the admin). We can consider it for 2.6
> since all the changes are still in the gweather-improve branch.

Shame it couldn't happen for 2.4- I really liked some of the
improvements. :/

Luis

> On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 08:52, Luis Villa wrote:
> > Kevin-
> > Would this have been helped if we'd set up something at
> > weather.gnome.org as you suggested some months ago, or was the problem
> > at the layer below that?
> > 
> > Luis
> > 
> > On Sat, 2003-07-12 at 09:49, Kevin Vandersloot wrote:
> > > Hi All. It seems that weather.interceptvector.com has become unreliable in 
> > > recent days, thus rendering gweather useless. I propose to revert the 
> > > changes made in 2.3.x (while keeping them in the gweather-improve branch) 
> > > and we can consider the imporvements for 2.6. Is this okay despite the 
> > > feature freeze?
> > > 
> > > Kevin
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > desktop-devel-list mailing list
> > > desktop-devel-list gnome org
> > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
> > > 
> 
> 
>