The current event that Subversive has achieved is meaningless. It is still
early in the process.
Mark
On 3/9/07, Hugo Visser <joegi@scene.nl> wrote:
>
> On a whole other note, does that mean that now that the subversive
> proposal is approved, the subclipse proposal will not be approved? If
> so, how will that impact subclipse if the svn team provider for
> Eclipse will be subversive?
>
> Hugo
>
> On Mar 7, 2007, at 9:47 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>
> > There is a post on EclipseZone that says I have gone to work for
> > Polarion. This is not true. I am assuming it is a mistake of the
> > author and that Polarion did not really spread this information at
> > EclipseCon.
> >
> > http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/t91217.html
> >
> > Hopefully it will be corrected by the time you read this as it is
> > also included in the aggregated blurb going around the Internet.
> >
> > I did recently get hired by CollabNet to work on Subversion and
> > Subclipse, and I assume that is the source of the author's
> > mistake. This is great new for this project (and of course me) so
> > it is distressing to see this post circulating which implies the
> > exact opposite has happened.
> >
> > Please do not flood the author or site with comments. I just
> > wanted to clarify this in advance.
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> >
> > Mark Phippard
> > http://markphip.blogspot.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subclipse.tigris.org
>
>
--
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
Received on Fri Mar 9 22:27:21 2007