On 16/01/13 09:05, Eric Lavarde - Debian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Daniel Pocock said:
>>> B. I doubt that such a badly named package would be of enough interest /
>>> quality for Debian packaging (but I might be wrong, I don't know any
>>> example)
>>
>> There are examples like this. It has been argued
Hi,
Daniel Pocock said:
>> B. I doubt that such a badly named package would be of enough interest /
>> quality for Debian packaging (but I might be wrong, I don't know any
>> example)
>
> There are examples like this. It has been argued by some developers
> that to compile using some toolchains (
On 14/01/2013 21:25, Tomasz Muras wrote:
> On 01/14/2013 09:16 PM, Eric Lavarde wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 14/01/13 19:48, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>> A few projects exist without following this convention, and sooner or
>>> later somebody may try to package one of them.
>>>
>>> According to the Java L
On 01/14/2013 09:16 PM, Eric Lavarde wrote:
Hello,
On 14/01/13 19:48, Daniel Pocock wrote:
A few projects exist without following this convention, and sooner or
later somebody may try to package one of them.
According to the Java Language Specification, using a domain name is a
"suggested conv
Hello,
On 14/01/13 19:48, Daniel Pocock wrote:
A few projects exist without following this convention, and sooner or
later somebody may try to package one of them.
According to the Java Language Specification, using a domain name is a
"suggested convention" and not a mandatory obligation. None
5 matches
Mail list logo
