renamings to remove extensions

Hi, I agree with Charles: this is unncessary, unproductive busy-work. On the other hand, Section 10.4 says only "the script name should not include an extension". So you can leave the extension for compatibility with the rest of the world. It is a bug, but Section 1.1 says: Non-conformance w

Re: Policy §10.4 as a divergence from usptream (renamings to remove extensions like .pl and .sh).

Reinhard Tartler writes: > Paul Wise writes: > > So get upstream to change their filenames before packaging them for > > Debian. > > Would you consider this a blocker to inclusion into Debian? Upstream > may either release very slowly or may just not care about Debian, > which would result in th

Re: Policy §10.4 as a divergence from usptream (ren amings to remove extensions like .pl and .sh).

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Paul Wise wrote: > Having an uncooperative upstream would likely make me think twice > about putting it in Debian in the first place. Or regret having already done so (gravitation, passage, primrose etc). -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To U

Re: Policy §10.4 as a divergence from usptream (ren amings to remove extensions like .pl and .sh).

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Would you consider this a blocker to inclusion into Debian? Upstream may > either release very slowly or may just not care about Debian, which > would result in the package to never end up in Debian. I'd consider not fixing it in the .de

Re: Policy §10.4 as a divergence from usptream (renamings to remove extensions like .pl and .sh).

Paul Wise writes: >> I know that there has already been much of talk about this, but I am >> am getting more and more uncomfortable removing .pl or .sh extensions >> from programs when upstream does not. > > So get upstream to change their filenames before packaging them for Debian. Would you co

Re: Policy §10.4 as a divergence from usptream (ren amings to remove extensions like .pl and .sh).

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Charles Plessy wrote: > I know that there has already been much of talk about this, but I am am > getting > more and more uncomfortable removing .pl or .sh extensions from programs when > upstream does not. So get upstream to change their filenames before packa

Policy §10.4 as a diver gence from usptrea m (renamings to remove extensions like .pl and .sh).

Dear all, I know that there has already been much of talk about this, but I am am getting more and more uncomfortable removing .pl or .sh extensions from programs when upstream does not. I use the packages I made, and renaming upstream programs names makes my scripts incompatible with my colleagu

Re: DEB_MAINTAINER_MODE=1 versus DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=network.

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Charles Plessy wrote: > in my first experimentations I used DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS, but this leads to the > possibility of clashing with flag names that can be reserved later with a > different behaviour. On the other hand, if there are enough packages made > using >

DEB_MAINTAINER_MODE=1 versus DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=network.

Le Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 10:20:40AM -0500, Raphael Geissert a écrit : > > Why not reuse the current env var used for that kind of things? > DEBIAN_BUILD_OPT. 'netavail' or something like that could be used to tell > the rules file that it is ok to try to do anything that requires an > interface. L

Orphaning my packages...

Hi all, I unfortunately don't have the free time at the moment to do much for the Debian Project, so I'm orphaning my packages. If anyone wants to stake a claim to any of the following, please go ahead and say so, otherwise I'll file the orphaning bugs within a couple days. (Follow-ups set to de

Re: Copyright infringement on www.rossbeazley.co.uk — Overreacting?

Obey Arthur Liu writes: > And how is planet debian licensed anyway ? There is an implicit > licensing of the blog authors to the planet since aggregation is > voluntary but what about redistribution ? :D Personally, my journal posts are intentionally not released under any license whatsoever. T

Re: cupt, the APT competitor

Hi, |--==> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 12:52:14 +0300, "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" said: EVL> This mail is to inform that Debian APT suite now has a competitor named Cupt [1]. For the ones who don't know it, I'd like to point out that there is at least one other competitor/companion/replacement of APT:

Re: Python2.6 in unstable?

Luk Claes wrote: > Bastian Venthur wrote: >> Stefano Zacchiroli schrieb: >>> On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 04:32:10PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: See the recent threads on debian-python, debian-devel and debian-release. >>> Given that Bastian's post is the first time I've seen the question >>> posed str

Re: Bug#548720: ITP: libkml -- The C++ library for supporting OGC KML 2.2 standard

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 09:36:58AM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote: > > It would be nice to mention what KML is. KML is standard for vector geo-data representation, also used in common applications like Google Maps and Earth. -- Francesco P. Lovergine -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@

Re: Python2.6 in unstable?

Bastian Venthur wrote: > Stefano Zacchiroli schrieb: >> On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 04:32:10PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: >>> See the recent threads on debian-python, debian-devel and debian-release. >> Given that Bastian's post is the first time I've seen the question >> posed straight away for the -deve

Re: Python2.6 in unstable?

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 20:58, Bastian Venthur wrote: > Someone asked for a list of open issues so people can jump in and try to > help to solve the issues so 2.6 can at least be in Squeeze, but > apparently this list does not exist. you can start work on these (Joss filed this bugs some days ago

Re: Python2.6 in unstable?

Stefano Zacchiroli schrieb: > On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 04:32:10PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: >> See the recent threads on debian-python, debian-devel and debian-release. > > Given that Bastian's post is the first time I've seen the question > posed straight away for the -devel public, can you please s

Re: /var/www is depracated, which directory to use?

]] Holger Levsen | Hi, | | On Montag, 28. September 2009, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: | > I realise you've had good an constructive responses for webapps, so | > commenting on /srv in particular: | > | > As I read it, putting stuff there is absolutely not fine. | | Where do you read this? | | htt

Re: Copyright infringement on www.rossbeazley.co.uk — Overreacting?

]] Obey Arthur Liu | And how is planet debian licensed anyway ? How is that relevant? Assuming you did put your own blog there (or asked it to be put there), you're ok with Planet Debian redistributing your content. | There is an implicit licensing of the blog authors to the planet since | agg

Re: Copyright infringement on www.rossbeazley.co.uk — Overreacting?

On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 07:34 -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Ben Hutchings dijo [Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 04:14:45AM -0700]: > > The "blog" at , which is hosted in your IP > > space, is a copy of Planet Debian , apparently > > intended to gain keyword

Re: different .diff.gz for different platforms (armel) prohibiting upload

Goswin von Brederlow writes: > Steffen Moeller writes: >> As a sidenote, and to promote the summary on >> http://wiki.debian.org/buildd a bit, there is a non-free buildd >> network. This has taken perfect care of my non-free packages so far, >> but it seems defunct for mips and armel these days.

Re: Transitional (dummy) packages considered silly

Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes: > Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> Do you happen to know the chapter/section where that is said? >> Note that "12.7 Changelog files" does not require a >> /usr/share/doc/changelog for native packages. > 2.3. Copyright considerations > -

Re: Transitional (dummy) packages considered silly

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 11:04:25AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Ok, so one would need to have at least an empty directory (say /usr) > in the package for it to disapear? Why the distinction? Because an empty package is valid (doesn't equivs create these?), and having Replaces: take effect

Re: Bug#548720: ITP: libkml -- The C++ library for supporting OGC KML 2.2 standard

Francesco Paolo Lovergine writes: > Description : The C++ library for supporting OGC KML 2.2 standard > > This is a Google's library for use with applications that want to > parse, generate and operate on KML. It is an implementation of the OGC > KML 2.2 standard. It is written in C++

Re: /var/www is depracated, which directory to use?

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 10:19:22PM +0800, Holger Levsen wrote: > > As I read it, putting stuff there is absolutely not fine. > > Where do you read this? > > http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#FTN.AEN1192 explicitly > says: "This is particularly important as these areas will often co

Processed: Re: Bug#548661: dpkg: Override package dependencies

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > reassign 548661 general Bug #548661 [dpkg] dpkg: Override package dependencies Bug reassigned from package 'dpkg' to 'general'. Bug No longer marked as found in versions dpkg/1.15.3.1. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you n

Re: Copyright infringement on www.rossbeazley.co.uk — Overreacting?

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Jonathan Yu wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) > wrote: > > Gunnar Wolf wrote: > >> Now... I am surprised this is seen so harshly. This is not the first > >> site I see that syndicates Planet Debian. What I can understand is

Re: Copyright infringement on www.rossbeazley.co.uk — Overreacting?

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote: > Gunnar Wolf wrote: >> Now... I am surprised this is seen so harshly. This is not the first >> site I see that syndicates Planet Debian. What I can understand is > > There's a big difference between aggregating posts and claimi

Re: Copyright infringement on www.rossbea zley.co.uk — Overreacting?

Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Now... I am surprised this is seen so harshly. This is not the first > site I see that syndicates Planet Debian. What I can understand is There's a big difference between aggregating posts and claiming that their yours. The heading of the site says that the site is the blog, a

Bug#548734: ITP: jruby1.3 -- 100% pure-Java implementation of Ruby

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Sebastien Delafond * Package name: jruby1.3 Version : 1.3.1 Upstream Author : The JRuby Team * URL : http://jruby.codehaus.org/ * License : tri-license CPL/GPL/LGPL Programming Lang: Java Description : 100% pure-J

Re: /var/www is depracated, which directory to use?

Hi, On Montag, 28. September 2009, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > I realise you've had good an constructive responses for webapps, so > commenting on /srv in particular: > > As I read it, putting stuff there is absolutely not fine. Where do you read this? http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html

Re: different .diff.gz for different platforms (armel) prohibiting upload

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 09:48:00PM +0800, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > On Montag, 28. September 2009, Rene Engelhard wrote: > > > That said uploading missing binaries yourself is not the rigt way > > > forward, official build daemons must be able to build it and you should > > > work with buildd

Bug#548730: ITP: libtest-poe-client-tcp-perl -- POE Component providing TCP client services for test cases

Package: wnpp Owner: Jonathan Yu Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org * Package name: libtest-poe-client-tcp-perl Version : 1.04 Upstream Author : Chris Williams * URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Test-POE-Client

Re: Transitional (dummy) packages considered silly

Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Russ Allbery writes: > >> Goswin von Brederlow writes: >> >>> Dpkg has the ability to vanish empty packages. A dummy package should >>> be completly empty and not even contain a /usr/share/doc/. >> Such a package is explicitly forbidden by Debian Policy. You need t

Re: different .diff.gz for different platforms (armel) prohibiting upload

Hi, On Montag, 28. September 2009, Rene Engelhard wrote: > > That said uploading missing binaries yourself is not the rigt way > > forward, official build daemons must be able to build it and you should > > work with buildd maintainers and porters to get your package built (and > > building). > If

Bug#548720: ITP: libkml -- The C++ library for supporting OGC KML 2.2 standard

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Francesco Paolo Lovergine * Package name: libkml Version : 1.0.1 Upstream Author : Google Inc. * URL : http://code.google.com/p/libkml/ * License : BSD Programming Lang: C++, Python and Java Description : The C++

Re: Copyright infringement on ww w.rossbeazley.co.uk — Overreacting?

Ben Hutchings dijo [Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 04:14:45AM -0700]: > The "blog" at , which is hosted in your IP > space, is a copy of Planet Debian , apparently > intended to gain keyword advertising revenue. > (…) > Since there are no contact detail

Bug#548719: ITP: bwa -- Burrows-Wheeler Aligner

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Charles Plessy Package name: bwa Version : 0.5.3 Upstream Author : Heng Li and others, see: http://bio-bwa.sourceforge.net/bwa.shtml URL : http://bio-bwa.sourceforge.net License : GPL Programming Lang: C Descri

Re: Copyright infringement on www.rossbeazley.co.uk

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Obey Arthur Liu wrote: > There are like hundreds of these cloning scams. Maybe we could implement > some kind of watermarking to blacklist IPs that do the cloning ? It would be trivial for them to work around that due to the OPML and FOAF feeds: http://planet.de

Re: Copyright infringement on www.rossbeazley.co.uk

On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 04:14 -0700, Ben Hutchings wrote: > The "blog" at , which is hosted in your IP > space, is a copy of Planet Debian , apparently > intended to gain keyword advertising revenue. > > Planet Debian aggregates a large number

Re: Copyright infringement on www.rossbeazley.co.uk

There are like hundreds of these cloning scams. Maybe we could implement some kind of watermarking to blacklist IPs that do the cloning ? On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > The "blog" at , which is hosted in your IP > space, is a copy of Planet

Copyright infringement on www.rossbeazley.co.uk

The "blog" at , which is hosted in your IP space, is a copy of Planet Debian , apparently intended to gain keyword advertising revenue. Planet Debian aggregates a large number of blogs, including mine (http://womble.decadent.org.uk/blog - lat

Re: GObject introspection mini-policy, take 2

Le dimanche 27 septembre 2009 à 10:59 +0800, Paul Wise a écrit : > >gir1.0-foo-2.0 /usr/lib/girepository-1.0/Foo-2.0.typelib > > Would this proposal need to be adjusted for multiarch support? I’m not sure. It will be mostly used by interpreters, which themselves don’t need support for mu

Re: different .diff.gz for different platforms (armel) prohibiting upload

Hi, On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 10:59:51AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > That said uploading missing binaries yourself is not the rigt way forward, > official build daemons must be able to build it and you should work with > buildd maintainers and porters to get your package built (and building). I

Re: zendframework package with or without bin package

Hi folks, sorry for duplicate message. I get the hint and a link: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/09/msg00812.html So ignore this new duplicate thread. regards, Frank -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact

Re: different .diff.gz for different platforms (armel) prohibiting upload

Steffen Moeller writes: > Russ Allbery wrote: >> Raphael Hertzog writes: >> >>> That said uploading missing binaries yourself is not the rigt way forward, >>> official build daemons must be able to build it and you should work with >>> buildd maintainers and porters to get your package built (a

Re: RC bug: symlinks in /etc

Paul Wise writes: > Personally I'd prefer installing the package's patterns to > /usr/share/l7-protocols. Patterns installed from source could go to > /usr/local/share/l7-protocols. Patterns created by the sysadmin could > be stored in /etc/l7-protocols/patterns.d (or similar) and the package > s

Re: Transitional (dummy) packages considered silly

Russ Allbery writes: > Goswin von Brederlow writes: > >> Dpkg has the ability to vanish empty packages. A dummy package should >> be completly empty and not even contain a /usr/share/doc/. > > Such a package is explicitly forbidden by Debian Policy. You need to > propose a Policy change if you

Re: Transitional (dummy) packages considered silly

Guillem Jover writes: > On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 10:51:50 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> Magnus Holmgren writes: >> > When a binary package is renamed or split, as well as if several packages >> > are >> > merged under a new name, transitional packages are normally created, which >> > dep

Re: /var/www is depracated, which directory to use?

Holger Levsen writes: > http://lintian.debian.org/tags/dir-or-file-in-var-www.html nor > debian-policy is helpful to resolve this issue - so I would like to > discuss this here and come up with a good solution. > > Suggestions? No package may touch /srv, but we could perhahs recommend its usage