On Sat, 21 Jul 2012, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> On 07/21/2012 12:31 AM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > The last time I touched this, no one had decided what the name of the
> > actual pseudo package was going to be. See
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=544192#25
>
> why exactly is 'debian-live' not ideal?
Because it sure sounds like a package name to me. I understand now
that you aren't planning on ever wanting to use it as a package name,
but it also means that no one else will ever be able to use it as a
package name.
> we already ruled your suspicion of 'that could potentially be a
> package name' out, it isn't a package name and never will be
> (debian-live tools are named live-* on purpose, so that they are
> derivatives friendly).
If you all are fine with it never being a package name in the future,
then that's fine by me. However, when I asked originally, it wasn't
clear to me that this had been considered.
> if you insist on not using debian-live as name within the bts for a
> pseudo-package, can we have live.debian.org then?
That's fine too.
> if we can't have live.debian.org without having the url first, let's
> have live.debian.net then, as this is what we use since many years
> consistently anywhere anyways.
This is also fine.
I'm also going to assume that the correct maintainer address for the
psuedopackage is debian-live@lists.debian.org?
And the description should be something like:
General problems with systems running Debian Live
Once the name is settled, I'll create the pseudopackage.
Don Armstrong
--
The carbon footprint of a single human being is enormous.
If you think about it, your honour,
I'm an environmentalist.
-- a softer world #283
http://www.asofterworld.com/index.php?id=283
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-live-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120721005902.gt32...@rzlab.ucr.edu
