les under debian/. Matching them to upstream is
> >best practice, to be sure, but to do so needs the permission of the
> >authors of all the files underneath there - especially, it looks like,
> >Mikhail Gusarov. It's not clear to me whether Matt Domsch's permission
> &
Twas brillig at 19:52:53 13.04.2009 UTC+02 when d...@net.com.org.es did gyre
and gimble:
>> What is the proper way to handle this change? Should I
>> conflict/replace those old packgaes in new python-pyinotify?
AS> You should just stop building them, and the old versions will get
AS> remove
Hi,
I've got source package (pyinotify) with 3 binary packages built from
it: python-pyinotify, python-pyinotify-dbg and python-pyinotify-doc.
In new upstream release author dropped the binary module (hence there is
no need for python-pyinotify-dbg) and moved all documentation to wiki
(so python-
Twas brillig at 12:27:07 when Hans Kratz did gyre and gimble:
HK> After repeatedly seeing interest in VMware Player packages for
HK> Debian I decided to post my work on packaging VMware Player. It
HK> should work fine on sarge and sid. Currently only i386 is
HK> supported, support for x86-64
Twas brillig at 23:31:50 01.01.2007 UTC+01 when Daniel Baumann did gyre and
gimble:
DB> This change simplifies the rules file, makes the build a bit
DB> faster, and does not have any influence on the binary packages.
Ah, this makes much more sense :) Thanks for hint, applied and
uploaded to
h
Twas brillig at 17:02:02 01.01.2007 UTC+01 when Daniel Baumann did gyre and
gimble:
DB> e.g. here, it is necessary that you list the sources as GPL2
DB> licensed, but you can use the normal gpl blurb for that, and not
DB> require the 'custom' gpl blurb from upstream. they are saying the
DB>
Twas brillig at 17:02:02 01.01.2007 UTC+01 when Daniel Baumann did gyre and
gimble:
DB> i don't understand why you have to wait for upstream, *how* you
DB> write things in debian/copyright is not determined by upstream,
DB> only *what* you write.
Normal GPL blurb includes copyright years, wh
Twas brillig at 14:32:00 01.01.2007 UTC+01 when Daniel Baumann did gyre and
gimble:
DB> * should: please use the common format for the copyright file,
DB> look at e.g. libextractor if unsure.
fixed.
DB> include also the full gpl blurb.
Will do when author releases 0.2.1 with copyright year
Twas brillig at 16:01:32 01.01.2007 UTC+01 when Nico Golde did gyre and gimble:
NG> I would suggest to rework the copyright it looks a bit=20 strange
NG> even if all needed information is included. What about the
NG> copyright year, the upstream files are from=20 October 2006 but
NG> Copyrig
Hi,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-pytils".
* Package name: pytils
Version : 0.3
Upstream Author : Pythy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://gorod-omsk.ru/blog/pythy/projects/pytils/
* License : GPL
Section : pyhton
It builds single
Hi,
After watching debian-mentors@ for a some time, I've found two types
of suggestions frequenly advised to the packagers:
* Removing empty lines from the end of debian/copyright,
debian/changelog
* Using two spaces before 'Homepage:' field in package description.
Do they look like candidate
Twas brillig at 20:01:23 31.12.2006 UTC+02 when Eng. Mina Ramses did gyre and
gimble:
EMR> Anyhow finally we can say that dead upstream requests are out of
EMR> interests/needs or even not in a need or require my work on
EMR> packaging it and it's better to search for these alternative
EMR>
Twas brillig at 08:25:32 30.12.2006 UTC+00 when Neil Williams did gyre and
gimble:
>> Documentation in autotools-dev helps, but it is pieceful, and
>> does not give whole picture how to build the package.
NW> I'm not clear here whether you mean package for distribution or
NW> package for D
Hi,
I'm looking for the Debian package which may be used as an 'hello
world' example of properly packaged shared library.
I picked up several random libraries on my system, but was unlucky to
find one usable to serve as example: they are either overly complex or
clearly violate autotools-dev reco
14 matches
Mail list logo
