Previously Josip Rodin wrote:
> However, if QA Group members make 3 consecutive bugfix uploads within two
> months, with still no action from the actual package maintainer, then the
> package will be marked orphaned, and the 'Maintainer' field of the
> package will be set to "Debian QA Group ".
I
Previously Marco d'Itri wrote:
> This is wrong. main/non-US is still part of main.
A couple of people have made that point by now, so I guess I have
to admin that technically main would still be consistent.
> The CD sold in the US would not be self contained, but having to
> download the non expo
Previously Charles C. Fu wrote:
> You're quite right, of course. I had overlooked ex-mode since I don't
> use it. (Hmm, it might be nice if vim entered ex-mode automatically
> on dumb terminals.)
vim defaults to a builtin ANSI terminal these days, which is probably
a more reasonable choice consi
On Sun, Jun 06, 1999 at 05:04:38PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> reassign 39030 mutt
> severity grave
> thanks
>
> This looks like it may well be the same bug as #31441: dear Thomas,
> please could you check if it might be? Have a look at:
> http://www.debian.org/Bugs/db/31/31441.html and let us
On Sun, Jun 06, 1999 at 01:48:39PM -0700, Chris Waters wrote:
> > In the normal development period (when only unstable and stable
> > distributions exist), delays are as follows:
> > * fix for a critical/grave bug: 2 days
> > * fix for any kind of security or important bug: 7
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In the normal development period (when only unstable and stable
> distributions exist), delays are as follows:
> * fix for a critical/grave bug: 2 days
> * fix for any kind of security or important bug:7 days
> * fix for a bug
On Jun 06, Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> * Proposal to allow software that depends on software in non-us into
>> main (currently restricted to contrib).
>> ( This may be unnecessary given the recent re-org of non-us. )
>
>I'm not sure I like this one. This would mea
[was it really neccessary to crosspost to three lists?]
On Mon, Jun 07, 1999 at 06:36:58AM -0700, Craig Brozefsky wrote:
> > However, if QA Group members make 3 consecutive bugfix uploads within two
> > months, with still no action from the actual package maintainer, then the
> > package will be
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, if QA Group members make 3 consecutive bugfix uploads within two
> months, with still no action from the actual package maintainer, then the
> package will be marked orphaned, and the 'Maintainer' field of the
> package will be set to "Debian QA G
Hi people,
I was told that the general public doesn't really know what is going
on on the Quality Assurance Group list, so I'll give you a peak preview
of the text we are planning to make our mini-policy.
This is not a formal proposal or something (yet), just something that you
just might want to
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I know the Pine 4.x series has issues with perms on mailboxes.
>> This needs to be kept in mind.
I think that's permissions on the mailspool directory, not the mailbox itself.
>The original submitter asked why 660, owned
Previously, I wrote:
>> If you agree with my traditional usage summary, vim would not be
>> suitable because it does not implement open mode and is thus pretty
>> unusable on dumb terminals.
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> replies:
> Yes it would: if you invoke vim as ex, ... hit Q while in v
Hi,
http://www.debian.org/Bugs/db/pa/ldebian-policy.html
One of the goals of the policy update mechanisms was to
eliminate, or at least ameliorate, the tendency for discussions to
get bogged down indefinitely on the mailing lists (we do thast quite
often ;-)
Since Julia
Hi,
>>"Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wichert> I'm not sure I like this one. This would mean that main is
Wichert> no longer self-contained, which I would consider a bad
Wichert> thing.
This is a matter of semantics, but I consider main to be
composed of main
mutt maintainer: is there anything you can do to fix or
alleviate this?
Julian
> Package: bugs.debian.org
> Version: 19990606
> Severity: critical
>
> we have lost 2 mail files in the past 4 days.
>
> the loss is *very* painful.
>
> MUA: mutt
> ii mutt
> Could sbdy explain me why?
>
> Why would I need to share this static data among several machines? This
> might mave been a concern when dskspace where a problem... Think that this
> breaks the idea of a packaging system too.
>
> And because this breaks the idea of a packaging system (the packa
> > > This is not actually true. cnews, console-tools, fidogate, gnomehack,
> > > gom, hwtools, kbd, and nethack still install files into /etc/rc.boot.
> >
> > I believe it to be true in *potato* (but you are right about these
> > packages in slink).
>
> I am also right about these packages in p
I second this proposal.
Julian
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
> I know the Pine 4.x series has issues with perms on mailboxes.
>
> This needs to be kept in mind.
The original submitter asked why 660, owned by group mail was needed.
This could be part of the reason.
Julian
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Policy still suggests /etc/rc.boot instead of /etc/rcS.d (#32448)
> > > * Proposed on 26 Jan 1999 by Brian Servis; seconded by Julian
> > > Gilbey.
> > > * Change policy to refer to /etc/rcS.d instead of the old
> > > /etc/rc.boot/
> > >
On Sun, Jun 06, 1999 at 01:18:35PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > Software depending on non-US (#37251)
> > * Under discussion.
> > * Proposed on 06 May 1999 by Marco d'Itri; seconded by Gordon
> > Matzigkeit, Joseph Carter, Chris Waters and Davide G. M. Salvett.
> > * Proposal to all
Previously Joey Hess wrote:
> Software depending on non-US (#37251)
> * Under discussion.
> * Proposed on 06 May 1999 by Marco d'Itri; seconded by Gordon
> Matzigkeit, Joseph Carter, Chris Waters and Davide G. M. Salvett.
> * Proposal to allow software that depends on software in non-us i
Previously Charles C. Fu wrote:
> If you agree with my traditional usage summary, vim would not be
> suitable because it does not implement open mode and is thus pretty
> unusable on dumb terminals.
Yes it would: if you invoke vim as ex, supply the -e option or hit Q
while in vim it will switch to
On Sat, Jun 05, 1999 at 08:57:51PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > Keep in mind that neither GIFs nor TIFFs per se have any problems. It is
> > the Lempel-Ziv compression algorithm, which is an optional part of the
> > image file formats, that is the problem.
>
> As I noted in my earlier messag
On Sun, 6 Jun 1999 at 01:19, Marco d'Itri wrote about "Re: weekly policy...":
> >Daemons should run as root only if really needed (#27205)
> > * Old.
> > * Proposed by Marco d'Itri.
> > * As title; this should be in policy.
> Anyone wants to second this? :-)
I'll bite. It's definitely wort
On Jun 05, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Software depending on non-US (#37251)
> * Stalled for 2 weeks.
> * Proposed on 06 May 1999 by Marco d'Itri; seconded by Gordon
>Matzigkeit, Joseph Carter, Chris Waters and Davide G. M. Salvett.
> * Proposal to allow software that depend
I know the Pine 4.x series has issues with perms on mailboxes.
This needs to be kept in mind.
Brock Rozen
I think that it should be somewhere in policy (wherever the BTS is being
discussed; and I know there are proposals out there right now for this)
that do not allow for a bug report to be closed unless it has been
fixed.
We have the system, it allows things to be stored. Even wishlist items
should n
> > > I have been using /usr/share for some time now in all my packages,
> > > including ones
> > > that were in the slink, release.
> > So?
> So it's nothing new...?
> I for one like /usr/share. Makes a hell of a lot more sense than /usr/lib for
> stuff
> like pixmaps nad hte like.
/usr/share
> > I'm opposed to putting any binaries in data.
> I can agree with this principle, however. It certainly would make the
> lines easier to draw.
How does blurring a line make it easier to draw?
--
see shy jo
I second this proposal.
--
see shy jo
On Sat, Jun 05, 1999 at 06:41:28PM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> > I have been using /usr/share for some time now in all my packages,
> > including ones
> > that were in the slink, release.
>
> So?
So it's nothing new...?
I for one like /usr/share. Makes a hell of a lot more sense than /us
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles C. Fu) writes:
> Personally, I would prefer to change the policy since it makes EDITOR
> preferred over VISUAL, which is the reverse of the behavior on my
> other systems.
Some historical perspective might be useful here.
The use of EDITOR is an ancient *NIX tradition
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 38212 [ACCEPTED 1999/05/23] Rewrite of section 5.7 (Programs for the
> X Window System)
Bug#38212: [AMENDMENT 1999/05/23] Rewrite of section 5.7 (Programs for the X
Window System)
Changed bug title.
> forwarded 38212 debian-policy@lists.debia
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 8221 [OLD PROPOSAL] Add ispell-dictionary to virtual package list
Bug#8221: ispell suggests non-existant package
Changed bug title.
> severity 8221 wishlist
Bug#8221: [OLD PROPOSAL] Add ispell-dictionary to virtual package list
Severity set to
> Joey Hess wrote:
> > Policy still suggests /etc/rc.boot instead of /etc/rcS.d (#32448)
> > * Proposed on 26 Jan 1999 by Brian Servis; seconded by Julian
> > Gilbey.
> > * Change policy to refer to /etc/rcS.d instead of the old
> > /etc/rc.boot/
> > ( No packages in potato still us
36 matches
Mail list logo
