[ Replies to debian-policy only please ]
Hi,
I'm struggling with WindowMaker 0.19.0 and I just noticed a "minor"
(yeah, right!) change in the way it parses configuration files at the source
code level. It will search for resources like this:
resourcePath/ext
arv[0]/ext
Hi,
>>"Luis" == Luis Francisco Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Luis> Now, if you guarantee proposals will have that header I don't
Luis> have a problem.
Well, I think that was part of the guidelines. We shall try
and strive to ensure it is adhered to
.
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Let me get this straignt. You can't be bothered to read your
> own mail, you cant be bothered to check a web page, you cant be
> bothered to filter the -devel list looking for the ^Subject: .*PROPOSAL:
> header into a new list, you can't be bothered to setup some
Hi,
>>"Luis" == Luis Francisco Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Given the use of the BTS, any such list is redundant.
Luis> Yeah right. I just said that reading all the messages that get into my
Luis> mailbox is too much and the solution is to force me to regularly check a
Luis> web pag
On Wed, 2 Sep 1998, Luis Francisco Gonzalez wrote:
> > So why don't you bookmark the bug page on policy? Any proposal
> > shall show up as a wishlist bug, and formal amendments shall show up
> > as regular bugs. The bug reports shall be retitles to show the
> > current status.
> >
> >
> So why don't you bookmark the bug page on policy? Any proposal
> shall show up as a wishlist bug, and formal amendments shall show up
> as regular bugs. The bug reports shall be retitles to show the
> current status.
>
> Given the use of the BTS, any such list is redundant.
Yeah r
Hi,
>>"Luis" == Luis Francisco Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Luis> With the amount of traffic in almost all debian lists, I can
Luis> hardly keep up with all of it. I do want to know the issues
Luis> discussed but get burried in lots of email. Now having that
Luis> list would allow me t
> Personally, I don't think that this is necessary, since I feel that
> developers who care about policy should read the group, and those who
> don't should be content to 'toe the line'. However, if someone else were
> to propose a scheme like that above, I wouldn't vote against it.
With the amoun
[ Please don't Cc:me, I will read your input in the list ]
Hi.
In bug #23255, Nicolás Lichtmaier reports that /etc/adjtime should
probably not be a "conffile" (i.e. a configuration file managed by dpkg
through the conffile mechanism), and he cites policy to support this.
However, since the defa
9 matches
Mail list logo
