<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Den 01.02.2022 05:12, skrev Phyllis
Smith via Cin:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAOckJE287kfHSdFwPVq7mJBmwkQ74sn5FvNXYwctfKf7sN2gsw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
By the way... isn't it time to remove from the download page
of the site <br>
(<a href="https://www.cinelerra-gg.org/downloads/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.cinelerra-gg.org/downloads/</a>),
the mentions and accesses to <br>
the now very outdated (more than two years of delay on
development) <br>
CinGG packages? A new user in too much of a hurry to read
everything <br>
would have a really unrepresentative experience of what
CinGG is now...<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Yes,
the more I thought about it, the more I agree. I will
look into removing them soon.</span> </div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
<br>
What about just changing the "Packages" section to a link "Old
Packages" on the main download page?<br>
Less confusing and self-explaining they are "old" and still
available for those who want to use them.<br>
<br>
Terje J. H<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>