UPDATED POLICY Was: Re: Policy problems.

On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 10:27:32PM +0100, Stefan Gybas wrote: > That's ok with me - I never really liked the dummy packages. I'll > remove the java-virtual-machine-dummy dependeny in the next Tomcat > version. Ok. I have now asked for the removal of these pacakges. > > To serve the same functiona

UPDATED POLICY Was: Re: Policy problems.

On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 10:27:32PM +0100, Stefan Gybas wrote: > That's ok with me - I never really liked the dummy packages. I'll > remove the java-virtual-machine-dummy dependeny in the next Tomcat > version. Ok. I have now asked for the removal of these pacakges. > > To serve the same function

Re: Policy problems.

Ola Lundqvist wrote: So because of this I have decided to ask for the removal of the current dummy packages because they will only make confusion > because some virtual packages have dummy packages and some have not. But before I do that I ask here to get your opinions. That's ok with me - I nev

Policy problems.

Hi I'll try to describe the problems that have hitted me when implementing the proposed policy. I have uploaded java-common (main) and java2-common (non-free) which creates a couple of dummy packages. Because some people do not think dummy packages (in the ftp-maintainer circle) are good it can no

Re: Policy problems.

Ola Lundqvist wrote: > So because of this I have decided to ask for the removal of > the current dummy packages because they will only make confusion > because some virtual packages have dummy packages and some > have not. But before I do that I ask here to get your opinions. That's ok wit

Policy problems.

Hi I'll try to describe the problems that have hitted me when implementing the proposed policy. I have uploaded java-common (main) and java2-common (non-free) which creates a couple of dummy packages. Because some people do not think dummy packages (in the ftp-maintainer circle) are good it can n