On 11/30/2007 03:18 AM, Charles Plessy wrote :
> Le Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 04:46:38PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
>> So, I would say that we actually have reached a consensus on that
>> format. We are simply missing wide acceptance, but that would come with
>> time ... and any package adoptin
Le Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 04:46:38PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
>
> So, I would say that we actually have reached a consensus on that
> format. We are simply missing wide acceptance, but that would come with
> time ... and any package adopting the new format would help :)
Hi all,
Since it
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 02:45:07PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Don't confuse it being mandatory with it being allowed. The format
Full ack.
In addition to that, before my last ping on the copyright proposal on
-devel, I remember having gone through the original thread and I
remember having not foun
Paul Wise wrote:
> when I return from VAC.
Arrggg (dying)...
So libapache-mod-log-sql is uploaded with a dependency to libdbi >=
0.8.2, and libdbi is not uploaded yet (because of that copyright problem)...
If another DD sees this message, would it be possible to upload by
libdbi and libdbi-d
or policy is that it *describes*
existing known-good practice, instead of *prescribing* a practice
before it becomes accepted.
So an "automatically parseable debian/copyright format" should be
adopted by many packages and acknowledged to be a benefit, *before*
any decision on making it man
On Nov 28, 2007 8:28 PM, Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMO there's nothing wrong with suggesting to do things in a certain way,
> even if there is no consensus about that (yet). Perhaps this suggestion
> looked a bit too much like "this is how it should be done" and not
> enough like "y
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 07:45:07PM +, Joey Hess wrote:
> Bart Martens wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:44 +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > I'd suggest that the copyright file
> > > should be redone and done so it can be parsed automatically:
> > >
> > > http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/Copyrig
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 10:27:21AM +0100, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:44 +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> > I'd suggest that the copyright file
> > should be redone and done so it can be parsed automatically:
> >
> > http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat
>
> On Wed, 2007-11
Bart Martens wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:44 +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> > I'd suggest that the copyright file
> > should be redone and done so it can be parsed automatically:
> >
> > http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> As far as I know, it has not yet been decid
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:44 +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> I'd suggest that the copyright file
> should be redone and done so it can be parsed automatically:
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 18:21 +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2007 6:15 PM, Bart Martens
[I'm on the list no need to CC me]
On Nov 28, 2007 6:15 PM, Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As far as I know, it has not yet been decided that the debian/copyright
> files must be formatted as described on the wiki page quoted above. Or
> did I miss some decision ?
You didn't miss any
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:44 +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> I'd suggest that the copyright file
> should be redone and done so it can be parsed automatically:
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat
Hi Paul,
As far as I know, it has not yet been decided that the debian/copyright
files mus
12 matches
Mail list logo
