Hello Wouter,
First thank for bringing back this issue, however...
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 10:17:01PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> The last post to this bug was done on 2004-08-23, which is ages ago. I
> think it's safe to say that Bill's proposal (create
> debian/rules.{version,targets} files which define what interfaces are
> implemented by the debian/rules file) did not get enough seconds.
...for the record: the debian/rules.{version,targets} was not the final
proposal. The final proposal was the addition of 'Build-Options' to
debian/control and this proposal was drafted after input from all the
people involved. This proposal is merely waiting for the dpkg
maintainers to make a decision on bug #229357 rather than shelved. Some
developers mentionned their willingness to second it.
As for your proposal: at the time of the discussion, the dpkg maintainer
made it clear it was not an option.
Since there are new dpkg maintainers, I asked them on Thu, 19 Jan 2006,
what was their opinion on the matter and whether they would accept my
proposal or yours. So far I did not get any answer.
I consider such answer to be a precondition to any useful subsequent
discussion on this topic.
If they reject my proposal but accept yours but if it require seconds, I
will be happy to second it.
What I don't want is my proposal to be discarded merely because I
proposed it two years ago, and the whole body of discussion wasted.
I have to say I am fighting with this issue since I am a Debian
developer (indeed my very first package triggered the bug) and
I resent the fact we could not manage to solve it in 5 years as an
inability of Debian to adress distribution-wide issues.
And please bear with me for taking this bug so personnally.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
