There are a lot of issues floating around here.
First, administrivia. Ian originally said:
| I hereby propose an amendment to the Debian Developers' Reference,
| s5.5 `Interim Releases'
If this topic under discussion is a proposed correction to the
devel-ref, we should refile the bug according
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 10 Oct 1998, Adam P. Harris wrote:
> > 2. info browsers, manual pagers, terminfo libraries, etc., are
>
> Yes, but where is the info program that looks in both directories?
> Before saying "this must be done in this way" I would like to be sure that
>
> This needs to be fixed, then. Unless we can guarantee that the same
> version of the same package will always work on all architectures,
> we need to be able to have differing source versions simultaneously
> while portability issues are sorted out.
I think Paul meant something different: If th
> This is an interesting idea, which could be investigated further.
Ok, then we could elaborate that idea...
> This probably ought to apply to _any_ NMU, not just an arch-specific
> one.
Yes, that was my intention (if I understand you right). If an NMU
doesn't upload the complete source, it sho
On Thu 15 Oct 1998, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Roman Hodek writes ("Bug#27906: PROPOSED] Binary-only NMU's"):
>
> >Since .nmu files aren't .dsc files, they constitute no real new
> >source version, thus they don't force other archs to recompile the
> >package, too. But the patch is publicall
Hi,
>>"Michael" == Michael Bramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Michael> Should we add: If the documentation is generated from a meta
Michael> language (like sgml) it must ship in the doc binary package
Michael> too. Or have we this in the policy?
We do not have such a policy, but I wou
Hi,
>>"Ian" == Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> It doesn't necessarily mean having everything spread all over
Ian> the user's disk during the transition, unless we can't help it.
Actually, having things partially in /usr/man and partially in
/usr/share/man (if that is what
Shouldn't we create with all this a `Linux registry' (sorry, but the
structure is very similar to the Windows one).
The `Linux registry' would be offered, through an API, to software
developers and other distributions, so there would be softeare enterely
configured with this registry.
On Wed, Oct 14, 1998 at 12:09:55PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> PROPOSAL: Policy manual contradicts itself about including docs
> ---
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
9 matches
Mail list logo
