Re: Shall we serve scripts as application or as text?

On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 10:58:45PM +0100, Roger Lynn wrote: > It is usually easy to save a text file from a web browser, while it is hard > (impossible?) to persuade it to display an unknown application/* type. Thus, > even if your latter example is more common, it may be preferable use text/. The

Re: Shall we serve scripts as application or as text?

On 2021-08-30 22:58:45 +0100 (+0100), Roger Lynn wrote: [...] > It is usually easy to save a text file from a web browser, while > it is hard (impossible?) to persuade it to display an unknown > application/* type. Thus, even if your latter example is more > common, it may be preferable use text/.

Re: Shall we serve scripts as application or as text?

On 29/08/2021 15:20, Simon McVittie wrote: The major difference is fallback behaviour. If a client (web browser or email client or similar) receives a file with a text/* type for which it has no special handler, in the absence of other context it is expected to treat it like text/plain, and show

Re: How to use remove-on-upgrade to remove a configuration file?

Niels Thykier: > Ludovic Rousseau: >> Hello Niels, >> >> Le 08/08/2021 à 09:09, Niels Thykier a écrit : >>> Ludovic Rousseau: [...] >>> >>> Hi Ludovic, >>> >>> You cannot use that feature yet as it would break during upgrade. The >>> dpkg version in stable does not support the feature.  Which

Re: Automated backports based on Janitor work?

On 30.08.21 15:49, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: > I think one of the main challenges here is to make sure that the > dependencies for packages in unstable/testing are correct. Why wouldn't they be correct, though? If it's less strict than it should be, then that is a bug. And if it's too strict, experime

Re: Shall we serve scripts as application or as text?

Quoting Gunnar Wolf (2021-08-30 17:07:23) > Simon McVittie dijo [Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 03:13:02PM +0100]: > > Using types outside text/ is definitely appropriate for very verbose text > > languages like SVG and "flat" OpenDocument, where it's *technically* > > text, and *technically* you could edit

Bug#993312: ITP: journal-abbreviations -- jabref journal abbreviations

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Bastien Roucariès X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Control: affects -1 kbibtex * Package name: jabref-journal-abbreviations Version : git Upstream Author : jabref authors * URL : https://github.com/JabRef/abbrv.jabref.

Re: Shall we serve scripts as application or as text?

Quoting Paul Wise (2021-08-30 02:32:14) > On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 2:13 PM Simon McVittie wrote: > > > For scripting languages like sh and Python, I'm not sure: either way > > could be appropriate. Which is more common: sharing scripts as source > > code to read and edit, or sharing scripts as exec

Re: Shall we serve scripts as application or as text?

Gunnar Wolf writes: > Simon McVittie dijo [Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 03:13:02PM +0100]: >> Using types outside text/ is definitely appropriate for very verbose >> text languages like SVG and "flat" OpenDocument, where it's >> *technically* text, and *technically* you could edit it with a text >> edito

Re: Shall we serve scripts as application or as text?

Simon McVittie dijo [Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 03:13:02PM +0100]: > Using types outside text/ is definitely appropriate for very verbose text > languages like SVG and "flat" OpenDocument, where it's *technically* > text, and *technically* you could edit it with a text editor, but in > practice that's ra

Re: Automated backports based on Janitor work?

Hi Lucas, On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 11:39:06AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Watching the talk[0] on automatically providing packages for new > upstream releases and new upstream git snapshots, I wondered if the same > tooling could be used to automatically provide stable backports > for packages i

Re: Bug#969631: can base-passwd provide the user _apt?

On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 11:53:59AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 12:30:49PM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote: > > So, while for some/most usecases something akin to DynamicUser would be > > enough, for others a more stable user would be preferred and then there > > are also ca

Re: Bug#969631: can base-passwd provide the user _apt?

On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 12:30:49PM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote: > On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 11:30:41PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > case) it seems mostly like the sort of user that could be anonymous > > outside of the lifetime of an apt process, analogous to systemd's > > DynamicUser. > > The

Re: Bug#969631: can base-passwd provide the user _apt?

On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 11:30:41PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > case) it seems mostly like the sort of user that could be anonymous > outside of the lifetime of an apt process, analogous to systemd's > DynamicUser. The _apt user started as 'nobody', but quickly people complained that they didn't w

Re: Bug#969631: can base-passwd provide the user _apt?

On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 11:30:41PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 11:31:05AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Colin Watson writes: > > > I think it's an interesting idea and worth pursuing, but on the face of > > > it it seems that this would end up violating policy 9.2.2: > >

mime.types vs mime/globs (was Re: Shall we serve scripts as application or as text?)

Le Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 10:53:04PM +, Thaddeus H. Black a écrit : > > What is the relationship between /etc/mime.types > and /usr/share/mime/globs, please? When to use the one and when, > the other? Hi Thaddeus, /etc/mime.types is a conffile; you can edit it and dpkg will ensure to preserve