On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 08:02:10AM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: > On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 01:31:32PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > - There are here and there discussions raising possible corner cases > > where distributing files with a name not representable in UTF-8 might > > be justified, for instance in test suites. > > Even though the general argument is correct, the particular example > probably applies to source packages in most cases. We don't control > source packages (unless we repack them), so I think they should not be > covered by a filename encoding policy.
Agreed. > > - Similar discussion also took place in #99933. I wonder about merging > > this > > bug (#701081) and #99933. > > I stumbled upon this bug before reporting this one and decided that the > issues were sufficiently separate from each other to warrant a new bug > number. I did not read the full bug log and therefore did not discover > that its scope widened to filenames as well. The discussion found > therein clearly is valuable. I still think that separating bugs for > filename encoding and file content encoding is a good idea, because > those issues can be solved independently. That said merging also makes > sense to point to the rest of the discussion. In the latter case, please > select a better summary message. > > I have to admit, that I am slightly in favour of just copying Fedora's > approach. Making distributions more compatible with each other seems > like a worthwhile thing to do. I would like to see examples of UTF-8 filenames in source packages that are not bugs and do not cause issues with some users before allowing them in policy. Policy still allow to use non utf-8 locales. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130302122455.GA2666@yellowpig
