http://blog.shaneliesegang.com/2009/02/angelic-revelation/ a panda wanders the electronic landscape Mon, 05 Dec 2011 17:04:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://blog.shaneliesegang.com/2009/02/angelic-revelation/comment-page-1/#comment-32 sjml Mon, 02 Feb 2009 04:56:49 +0000 http://blog.shaneliesegang.com/?p=57#comment-32 2.0, but most of them are under 1.1 as well. 2.0, but most of them are under 1.1 as well.

]]> http://blog.shaneliesegang.com/2009/02/angelic-revelation/comment-page-1/#comment-31 Joe Mon, 02 Feb 2009 04:56:05 +0000 http://blog.shaneliesegang.com/?p=57#comment-31 Are the things under "Angel provides" for 2.0 or 1.1? Are the things under “Angel provides” for 2.0 or 1.1?

]]> http://blog.shaneliesegang.com/2009/02/angelic-revelation/comment-page-1/#comment-30 sjml Mon, 02 Feb 2009 01:40:08 +0000 http://blog.shaneliesegang.com/?p=57#comment-30 Yeah, that's a little bit lame, but I understand it. The hope was that it could be a two-way street with them pulling and contributing, but hey, legal's default is to disallow things. <shrug></shrug> Yeah, that’s a little bit lame, but I understand it. The hope was that it could be a two-way street with them pulling and contributing, but hey, legal’s default is to disallow things.

]]> http://blog.shaneliesegang.com/2009/02/angelic-revelation/comment-page-1/#comment-29 Borut Mon, 02 Feb 2009 01:30:24 +0000 http://blog.shaneliesegang.com/?p=57#comment-29 Nice! I didn't know they let you open it up. It's not dead (yet), although somehow I doubt they'll let contributions go up to the google code project. :( Nice! I didn’t know they let you open it up. It’s not dead (yet), although somehow I doubt they’ll let contributions go up to the google code project. :(

]]>