Re: Looking for an advocate to become "taper"-maintainer

2002-09-02 Thread Craig Small
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 09:18:15PM +0200, Markus Kolb wrote: > my intention is to adopt the taper-Package. > I just package the new taper upstream release. > Well, to start the NM-process and become a new maintainer I need an > advocate. > Is anyone interested in doing this for me? > I'd be very ha

Re: Looking for an advocate to become "taper"-maintainer

2002-09-02 Thread Craig Small
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 09:18:15PM +0200, Markus Kolb wrote: > my intention is to adopt the taper-Package. > I just package the new taper upstream release. > Well, to start the NM-process and become a new maintainer I need an > advocate. > Is anyone interested in doing this for me? > I'd be very h

Looking for an advocate to become "taper"-maintainer

2002-09-02 Thread Markus Kolb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, my intention is to adopt the taper-Package. I just package the new taper upstream release. Well, to start the NM-process and become a new maintainer I need an advocate. Is anyone interested in doing this for me? I'd be very happy if waiting has a

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Markus Kolb
Alexandre wrote: [...] Let package A depend on package B and C. Let package B depend on package C. I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it OK -- or better -- to let it depend only on B? [...] So I'm pretty certa

Looking for an advocate to become "taper"-maintainer

2002-09-02 Thread Markus Kolb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, my intention is to adopt the taper-Package. I just package the new taper upstream release. Well, to start the NM-process and become a new maintainer I need an advocate. Is anyone interested in doing this for me? I'd be very happy if waiting has a

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Markus Kolb
Alexandre wrote: [...] > Let package A depend on package B and C. > Let package B depend on package C. > I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. > > Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it > OK -- or better -- to let it depend only on B? [...] > So I'm p

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Jérôme Marant
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:46:53PM +0200, Alexandre wrote: > Hello, > > Let package A depend on package B and C. > Let package B depend on package C. > I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. > > Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it > OK -- or better -

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Bastian Kleineidam
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:46:53PM +0200, Alexandre wrote: > Hello, > > Let package A depend on package B and C. > Let package B depend on package C. > I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. > > Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it > OK -- or better -

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Peter Palfrader
On Mon, 02 Sep 2002, Alexandre wrote: > Hello, > > Let package A depend on package B and C. > Let package B depend on package C. > I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. > > Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it > OK -- or better -- to let it depend o

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Jesus Climent
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:46:53PM +0200, Alexandre wrote: > Hello, > > Let package A depend on package B and C. > Let package B depend on package C. > I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. > > Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it > OK -- or better -

chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Alexandre
Hello, Let package A depend on package B and C. Let package B depend on package C. I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it OK -- or better -- to let it depend only on B? In the case at hand: A = python2.1-xml B =

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Jérôme Marant
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:46:53PM +0200, Alexandre wrote: > Hello, > > Let package A depend on package B and C. > Let package B depend on package C. > I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. > > Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it > OK -- or better

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Bastian Kleineidam
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:46:53PM +0200, Alexandre wrote: > Hello, > > Let package A depend on package B and C. > Let package B depend on package C. > I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. > > Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it > OK -- or better

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Peter Palfrader
On Mon, 02 Sep 2002, Alexandre wrote: > Hello, > > Let package A depend on package B and C. > Let package B depend on package C. > I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. > > Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it > OK -- or better -- to let it depend

Re: chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Jesus Climent
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:46:53PM +0200, Alexandre wrote: > Hello, > > Let package A depend on package B and C. > Let package B depend on package C. > I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. > > Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it > OK -- or better

chained dependencies handling in debian/control

2002-09-02 Thread Alexandre
Hello, Let package A depend on package B and C. Let package B depend on package C. I maintain A, someone else maintains B and C. Should I explicitely let A depend on B and C in debian/control, or is it OK -- or better -- to let it depend only on B? In the case at hand: A = python2.1-xml B =