Re: tasks: counterproposal (and implimentation)

2001-05-14 Thread Branden Robinson
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:05:22PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > - With package sets, it is delivered ... ? In a package called package-sets-progeny, and manipulated via binaries in the packages pkgset-tools and pkgset-tools-gnome. -- G. Branden Robinson | What influenced me to ath

Re: tasks: counterproposal (and implimentation)

2001-05-14 Thread Anthony Towns
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:02:53PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Anthony Towns wrote: > > For comparison, using task- packages, if I remove the core packages from > > a task from woody, I can just also remove the task- from woody. > In a sense, doing it programmatically is cleaner and less work in the

Re: tasks: counterproposal (and implimentation)

2001-05-14 Thread Joey Hess
Branden Robinson wrote: > We have "package sets". > > Here's an example: > > /usr/share/package-sets/progeny/xemacs.contents > /usr/share/package-sets/progeny/xemacs.description > > $ cat /usr/share/package-sets/progeny/xemacs.contents > xemacs21 > xemacs21-bin > xemacs21-mule > xemacs21-support

Re: tasks: counterproposal (and implimentation)

2001-05-14 Thread Joey Hess
Anthony Towns wrote: > > enhancements to deal with cases where all the packages in a task, or at > > least some of the important ones, are missing. Noticing all are missing > > and not displaying the task in the list is easy enough. Noticing that > > the core packages of a task (postgresl, apache)

Re: Is it allowed to remove old changelog entries?

2001-05-14 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Mon, 14 May 2001, Colin Watson wrote: >... > Also see #82790, whose maintainer apparently never keeps more than one > changelog entry. Unfortunately, unless someone has the old changelog > entries and can NMU, not a lot can be done about it. After reading Thomas' answer it seems to be the corr

CVS jdg: * Improved 10.1.2 example (fixes bug#92744)

2001-05-14 Thread debian-policy
CVSROOT:/cvs/debian-policy Module name:debian-policy Changes by: jdg Mon May 14 13:35:13 PDT 2001 Modified files: . : policy.sgml upgrading-checklist.html debian : changelog Log message: * Improved 10.1.2 example (fixes bug#92744) * Other

Re: Is it allowed to remove old changelog entries?

2001-05-14 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 08:21:07PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Adrian Bunk wrote: > > It seems he's right and I can't find a place in the policy that forbids > > the deletion of old changelog entries or did I miss something? > > It also doesn't allow it. Common behaviour seems to b

Re: Is it allowed to remove old changelog entries?

2001-05-14 Thread Adrian Bunk
On 14 May 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Policy doesn't seem to forbid it, but it should be assumed that they > should be retained. There is no good reason to ever snip changelogs. > > Maintainers have to do the Right Thing, and not merely say "policy > doesn't forbid it". Policy doesn't fo

Re: Is it allowed to remove old changelog entries?

2001-05-14 Thread Colin Watson
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I had some time ago a discussion with Paul Slootman in #85936 about the >removal of old changelog entries. He did remove at one point all changelog >entries except the latest on (and Raphael Bossek did recently the same in >some of his packages). Paul simply

Re: Is it allowed to remove old changelog entries?

2001-05-14 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I had some time ago a discussion with Paul Slootman in #85936 about the > removal of old changelog entries. He did remove at one point all changelog > entries except the latest on (and Raphael Bossek did recently the same in > some of his packages). Paul s

Re: Is it allowed to remove old changelog entries?

2001-05-14 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Adrian Bunk wrote: > It seems he's right and I can't find a place in the policy that forbids > the deletion of old changelog entries or did I miss something? It also doesn't allow it. Common behaviour seems to be to move the old changelog entries in a seperate file. Old changelog entri

Is it allowed to remove old changelog entries?

2001-05-14 Thread Adrian Bunk
Hi, I had some time ago a discussion with Paul Slootman in #85936 about the removal of old changelog entries. He did remove at one point all changelog entries except the latest on (and Raphael Bossek did recently the same in some of his packages). Paul simply closed #85936 with the comment <-- s

Re: "Defaults for satisfying dependencies - ordering" gone?

2001-05-14 Thread Anthony Towns
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 12:47:50PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > BTW which would the default be, Depends: ae | editor? Or should we have a > flamewar^Wdiscussion on devel about it? }:) Note that ae isn't being installed by woody boot-floppies atm (nvi and nano are instead). Cheers, aj -- Anthony

Re: "Defaults for satisfying dependencies - ordering" gone?

2001-05-14 Thread Josip Rodin
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 07:24:34AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > >> Why is that not viable? > >> > >> Do the following: > >> > >> * Make all the different editor packages provide the virtual package > >> "editor". > >> * Create a real package "editor-proxy", which depends on "editor", and > >> i