On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 11:21:02AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 08:39:10PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > * it's not ftp-master's business to judge on _technical_ merits of the
> > pacakge (bad packaging practices, missing dependencies, ignores
> > /chapter and verse/ of policy, ...), so we can safely rule that one
> > out
>
> Uh, wtf are you on?
Anthony, please, think in context. Use some common sense.
I'm not talking about stupid mistakes, ok?
I'm not talking about plain idiotic either.
Or is it now your intention to burden the bunch of people who actually
do some work as ftp-master with package nitpicking, too? Give me a
break.
Let me use a package of mine as an example: mesa 6.2.1-1 (source)
produces, among others, the binary package mesag3. This package ships
libGL.so.1. This is a violation of 8.1 ("The run-time shared library
needs to be placed in a package called `<libraryname><soversion>'
[...]"). So, is ftp-master going to prevent this package from entering
the archive because of this? Guess what? There's a reason for me not
following policy in this case. And I've been not following it for
several years and across several releases now.
Better?
Marcelo
PS: And just to answer your question, I get the impression that I'm
"on" stuff much milder than you usually are, coffee being the
strongest, and tea the usual.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
