Jon Dowland dixit:
>The stuff is things such as "minified" js. The wordpress source contains the
>minified copies, and you can get the originals in separate tarballs from the
>wordpress site.
Eh, I’d call that RC. People have been told off for not including the
corresponding source in the .orig.t
* Jon Dowland:
> So if I understand the situation correctly; wordpress ships a pre-build binary
> which cannot be generated in Debian? Whether the source is in a separate
> package or not, this does not feel right.
It's not without precedent. Ocaml bootstraps off a binary blob to
avoid a cyclic
Hi,
(Corsac was right, you'd better CC the maintainers with whom you want to
discuss...)
On Wed, 16 May 2012, Russell Coker wrote:
> Would it be possible to have somewhere on the Debian servers for storing such
> files so that they can be referenced in a README file or something rather
> than
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 03:56:25PM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> Hopefully you've got the build-dependencies too. Which, if the source packages
> were split off into other packages, you'd then pull in.
Being able to read the source code can often get you quite far already,
but yes, usually, I want a
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:10:55PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
> If you say "download some, and ignore the others in most cases", please
> consider that in the case you really find out that you need the source,
> you'll most likely be offline, and cannot do much about it (Murphy's
> laws apply gener
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 05:53:11PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
> > Would it be possible to have somewhere on the Debian servers for storing
> > such
> > files so that they can be referenced in a README file or something rather
> > than
> > sent
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 02:20:48PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Unfortunately, swfupload *cannot* be packaged in Debian because we have no
> ways of building it (unless the situation changed with adobe tools... in
> which case, I would really like to hear about it!). The only thing you could
> pa
On mer., 2012-05-16 at 19:45 +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> I just downloaded the source to Wordpress from Squeeze, it's got a 14M
> .debian.tar.xz which is mostly sources for things that are included in the
> upstream tarball. The build process appears to only use the upstream tarball
> code so
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Unfortunately, swfupload *cannot* be packaged in Debian because we have
> no ways of building it (unless the situation changed with adobe tools... in
> which case, I would really like to hear about it!). The only thing you could
> package
>
On 05/16/2012 08:45 PM, Jon Dowland wrote:
> Of course, many of these could be separate source/binary packages in their own
> right[1], as they have value outside of wordpress, and be
> Build-Depends/Depends
> of wordpress. In fact a few already are: jquery (already packaged); swfupload
> (not yet
[Russell Coker]
> Would it be possible to have somewhere on the Debian servers for
> storing such files so that they can be referenced in a README file or
> something rather than sent to everyone? I'm sure that most people
> who build a Wordpress package won't use them.
As Paul Wise said, best i
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 05:53:11PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> Seems like a bug, the best way to determine that sources are still
> buildable is to always build them.
The stuff is things such as "minified" js. The wordpress source contains the
minified copies, and you can get the originals in separa
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
> I just downloaded the source to Wordpress from Squeeze, it's got a 14M
> .debian.tar.xz which is mostly sources for things that are included in the
> upstream tarball. The build process appears to only use the upstream tarball
> code so the
13 matches
Mail list logo
