Re: Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-29 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
]] Joachim Breitner > Practically, I expect the intersection of those who want to use this > package, and who need to have a different layout in /srv to be empty. > So if I make the path configurable, it is adding complexity purely for > policy compliance, and hence it is low priority for me. I

Re: Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-25 Thread Marvin Renich
* Joachim Breitner [150823 07:24]: > With pow-priority, you mean one that does not get shown by default? But > is that much better than allowing the interested admin to change the > configuration afterwards? Actually, I was thinking it should be similar to postfix, which looks like it is using me

Re: Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-23 Thread Joachim Breitner
Hi Sven, Am Sonntag, den 23.08.2015, 18:18 +0200 schrieb Sven Bartscher: > > Note that my package does _not_ touch or put files in /srv. It > > merely > > uses files that are put in a certain directory that, that the admin > > has to create first. Does that mitigate your concerns? > > A problem,

Re: Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-23 Thread Sven Bartscher
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 13:24:03 +0200 Joachim Breitner wrote: > Hi Marvin, > > Am Samstag, den 22.08.2015, 16:47 -0400 schrieb Marvin Renich: > > I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that part of the > > purpose of /srv was to allow complete admin discretion with the > > directory struct

Re: Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-23 Thread Joachim Breitner
Hi Marvin, Am Samstag, den 22.08.2015, 16:47 -0400 schrieb Marvin Renich: > I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that part of the > purpose of /srv was to allow complete admin discretion with the > directory structure, and that distributions were not to mandate any > specific directory

Re: Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-22 Thread Afif Elghraoui
On السبت 22 آب 2015 13:47, Marvin Renich wrote: >> So it is not wrong to use this directory. Also, all alternatives are >> > wrong in some way as well. > I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that part of the purpose > of /srv was to allow complete admin discretion with the directory > st

Re: Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-22 Thread Marvin Renich
* Joachim Breitner [150822 09:04]: > Hi Jakub, > > Am Samstag, den 22.08.2015, 14:54 +0200 schrieb Jakub Wilk: > > * Joachim Breitner , 2015-08-22, 13:58: > > > With this package installed, every Debian package (i.e. a *.deb > > > file) > > > dropped into /srv/local-apt-repository > > > > Soun

Re: Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-22 Thread Joachim Breitner
Hi Jakub, Am Samstag, den 22.08.2015, 14:54 +0200 schrieb Jakub Wilk: > * Joachim Breitner , 2015-08-22, 13:58: > > With this package installed, every Debian package (i.e. a *.deb > > file) > > dropped into /srv/local-apt-repository > > Sounds like an FHS violation: “no program should rely on a

Re: Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-22 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Joachim Breitner , 2015-08-22, 13:58: With this package installed, every Debian package (i.e. a *.deb file) dropped into /srv/local-apt-repository Sounds like an FHS violation: “no program should rely on a specific subdirectory structure of /srv existing or data necessarily being stored in

Bug#796529: ITP: local-apt-repository -- Ready to use local apt repository

2015-08-22 Thread Joachim Breitner
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Joachim Breitner -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * Package name: local-apt-repository Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : Joachim Breitner * URL : http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/local-apt-repository.git/