This one time, at band camp, Craig Small said:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 10:28:07PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't p
This one time, at band camp, Colin Watson said:
> "Should" just means that the package won't be thrown out of the
> distribution if it isn't fixed, unlike "must". It doesn't necessarily
> mean that it's OK to ignore it. Certainly, I think people ought to have
> a very good reason to ignore "should"
This one time, at band camp, Craig Small said:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 10:28:07PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> > program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> > looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't p
This one time, at band camp, Colin Watson said:
> "Should" just means that the package won't be thrown out of the
> distribution if it isn't fixed, unlike "must". It doesn't necessarily
> mean that it's OK to ignore it. Certainly, I think people ought to have
> a very good reason to ignore "should"
David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anyone who could provide me with help on how to package plugins for
> The GIMP?
>
> #1: Would I install the plugins using gimptool --install-admin-bin
> after compiling it (with proper path-overrides to get the files in
> $(CURDIR)/debian//),
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 10:28:07PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> itself trivial to work around, bu
Hi,
> $updateSQL = $conn->GetUpdateSQL($rs, $record);
> gives me "UPDATE FOO set bar=1".
IMO this one justifies an upload into stable (severe data loss), but the
fix should of course be backported.
Simon
--
GPG Fingerprint: 040E B5F7 84F1 4FBC CEAD ADC6 18A0 CC8D 5706 A4B4
pgp5t3cWWjxCf
Hi
> Should I do nothing an tag as wontfix? Or try to upload into stable?
> Any comments?
IMHO, these are quite serious bugs, but do not render the package
unusable OR pose any security threat, since using GetUpdateSQL is not
the only way to do it.
Furthermore, introducing the new version to stab
David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anyone who could provide me with help on how to package plugins for
> The GIMP?
>
> #1: Would I install the plugins using gimptool --install-admin-bin
> after compiling it (with proper path-overrides to get the files in
> $(CURDIR)/debian//),
Hi all,
just to make sure. Is the following bug report (problem) enough to
upload the libphp-adodb version from testing into stable?
I think not. It's only a feature request for the old version which is
already included in the latest libphp-adodb version. And the in testing
is much newer then th
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 10:28:07PM -0500, Stephen Gran wrote:
> I have a question about how to proceed. I am considering packaging a
> program, and it uses a nonstandard versioning scheme. It ends up
> looking like -DR7.10. dh_make doesn't parse this - this in
> itself trivial to work around, bu
Hi,
> $updateSQL = $conn->GetUpdateSQL($rs, $record);
> gives me "UPDATE FOO set bar=1".
IMO this one justifies an upload into stable (severe data loss), but the
fix should of course be backported.
Simon
--
GPG Fingerprint: 040E B5F7 84F1 4FBC CEAD ADC6 18A0 CC8D 5706 A4B4
msg08344/pgp
> Hi,
>
> Should changelog.Debian include changes that precede the inclusion
> in Debian ?
Hi,
I was told recently (by my AM) that yes, that your changelog must record
the complete history of your package, since you started working on it.
...Pity, I had already discarded MANY revisions :)
--
G
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 08:41:21PM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> Should changelog.Debian include changes that precede the inclusion
> in Debian ?
I don't think that this is an obligation. However, if it is more
conevenient for you to keep track of the changes you did then
I don't see a reason no
Hi
> Should I do nothing an tag as wontfix? Or try to upload into stable?
> Any comments?
IMHO, these are quite serious bugs, but do not render the package
unusable OR pose any security threat, since using GetUpdateSQL is not
the only way to do it.
Furthermore, introducing the new version to stab
Phil Brooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I have a package with fixes that I think may be worthy of going into a
> stable point release, do I
> - just upload it to proposed-updates (by setting the distribution to
>stable in the changelog) and assume that if it is not worthy, it will
>s
Hi,
Should changelog.Debian include changes that precede the inclusion
in Debian ?
Frank
Hi all,
If I have a package with fixes that I think may be worthy of going into a
stable point release, do I
- just upload it to proposed-updates (by setting the distribution to
stable in the changelog) and assume that if it is not worthy, it will
simply be ignored/rejected;
- email the st
Hi all,
just to make sure. Is the following bug report (problem) enough to
upload the libphp-adodb version from testing into stable?
I think not. It's only a feature request for the old version which is
already included in the latest libphp-adodb version. And the in testing
is much newer then th
> Hi,
>
> Should changelog.Debian include changes that precede the inclusion
> in Debian ?
Hi,
I was told recently (by my AM) that yes, that your changelog must record
the complete history of your package, since you started working on it.
...Pity, I had already discarded MANY revisions :)
--
G
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 08:41:21PM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> Should changelog.Debian include changes that precede the inclusion
> in Debian ?
I don't think that this is an obligation. However, if it is more
conevenient for you to keep track of the changes you did then
I don't see a reason no
Phil Brooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I have a package with fixes that I think may be worthy of going into a
> stable point release, do I
> - just upload it to proposed-updates (by setting the distribution to
>stable in the changelog) and assume that if it is not worthy, it will
>s
Hi,
Should changelog.Debian include changes that precede the inclusion
in Debian ?
Frank
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anyone who could provide me with help on how to package plugins for
The GIMP?
#1: Would I install the plugins using gimptool --install-admin-bin
after compiling it (with proper path-overrides to get the files in
$(CURDIR)/debian//), or would it be better copy the
plugins to the approri
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:02:36AM -0500, Aaron Haviland wrote:
> Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > You might want to check policy before filing a bug:
> >
> >http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-versions.html
> >
> > As I read it, the relevant section is:
> >
> >The upstream_version may
Hi all,
If I have a package with fixes that I think may be worthy of going into a
stable point release, do I
- just upload it to proposed-updates (by setting the distribution to
stable in the changelog) and assume that if it is not worthy, it will
simply be ignored/rejected;
- email the st
> This is exactly why I asked - the real key word here is 'should'. It's
> not a must, but on the other hand, it's not unreasonable, either. I've
> written to upstream to begin talking with them about this and other
> issues, and who knows, maybe they'll want to go to a reasonable version
> numbe
Anyone who could provide me with help on how to package plugins for
The GIMP?
#1: Would I install the plugins using gimptool --install-admin-bin
after compiling it (with proper path-overrides to get the files in
$(CURDIR)/debian//), or would it be better copy the
plugins to the approri
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:02:36AM -0500, Aaron Haviland wrote:
> Kenneth Pronovici said:
> > You might want to check policy before filing a bug:
> >
> >http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-versions.html
> >
> > As I read it, the relevant section is:
> >
> >The upstream_version may
> This is exactly why I asked - the real key word here is 'should'. It's
> not a must, but on the other hand, it's not unreasonable, either. I've
> written to upstream to begin talking with them about this and other
> issues, and who knows, maybe they'll want to go to a reasonable version
> numbe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I'm working on some software and i'm searching for a sponsor.
I'm interested in packaging katoob for Debian
Katoob is a multi-lingual BIDI aware unicode text editor written using
the Gtk+ library set "version 2+"
I've finished packaging the app. al
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I'm working on some software and i'm searching for a sponsor.
I'm interested in packaging katoob for Debian
Katoob is a multi-lingual BIDI aware unicode text editor written using
the Gtk+ library set "version 2+"
I've finished packaging the app. al
32 matches
Mail list logo
