On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 07:15:09PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > No, the same functionality is _NOT_ served by tags. Like it or
> > not, our bug listing are done by severity, and shoving policy
> > violation into a tag degrades the importance of not violating
> > pol
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 04:12:09PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> No, the same functionality is _NOT_ served by tags. Like it or
> not, our bug listing are done by severity,
Strange; this point wasn't relevant when I was the one making it.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2002/debian-
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> No, the same functionality is _NOT_ served by tags. Like it or
> not, our bug listing are done by severity, and shoving policy
> violation into a tag degrades the importance of not violating
> policy.
Seems to me that if bug severity is orthagonal to release cri
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 04:12:09PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Gotcha. Your humor detector is on the blink.
Ah, I see. So was the part where you called me a hypocrite a joke or
not?
--
G. Branden Robinson|A committee is a life form with six
Debian GNU/Linux
Previously Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On the other hand, all packages must not be left to the whimsy
> of the dpkg developers either; since potentially large numbers of
> packages would be impacted by such changes.
I do hope you trust is to make changes sensibly. In fact the current
referen
>>"Branden" == Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Branden> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 03:10:34PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Strawman.
Branden> ? I don't see how.
>> The rationale I presented argues for creating a severity to use for
>> violations of policy. The point was to
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 03:10:34PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Strawman.
? I don't see how.
> The rationale I presented argues for creating a severity to use for
> violations of policy. The point was to allow for violations of must
> directives to be flagged as problems in themsel
>>"Wichert" == Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wichert> Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
>> Surely either everything necessary should be in the dpkg reference or
>> everything necessary should be in policy.
Wichert> I'm not sure. I see them more as complementing each other, much l
>>"Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Julian> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 02:30:34PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>
>> Refer to a dpkg reference instead and document extra restrictions
Julian> Surely either everything necessary should be in the dpkg reference or
Julian> eve
>>"Branden" == Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Branden> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 09:33:51AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Trust you guys to have a discussion on serious severities
>> after I went to bed. I note in scrollback that the very existence
>> was of the severity was c
>>"Julian" == Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Julian> People *used* to make that complaint. And if we now move to having a
Julian> lean policy standards document and a developers reference and a best
Julian> programming advice document and a dpkg documentation document, we'll
Julian
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 09:33:51AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Trust you guys to have a discussion on serious severities
> after I went to bed. I note in scrollback that the very existence
> was of the severity was called into question, and no one seemed to
> remember the ration
Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Surely either everything necessary should be in the dpkg reference or
> everything necessary should be in policy.
I'm not sure. I see them more as complementing each other, much like
RFC1855 (netiquette) complements RFC822 (email format) or how a
users manual comp
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 02:30:34PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > Part I: The Debian Archive
> > 1: DFSG and the sections of the archive (free, non-free, contrib, non-us)
>
> non-us is a different archive.
I understand; this was just an imprecise abbreviatio
Previously Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Part I: The Debian Archive
> 1: DFSG and the sections of the archive (free, non-free, contrib, non-us)
non-us is a different archive.
> Part II: Packages and metadata
Refer to a dpkg reference instead and document extra restrictions
Wichert.
--
__
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 01:44:50AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Anthony> Policy at the moment provides a fairly thorough grounding in
> Anthony> Debian's best practices. That's highly useful.
>
> Thorough is a matter of opinion. I think it is inconsistent,
> bumbling mess, occasionall
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 12:03:38AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > and meet
> > the most frequent complaint about the old policy + packaging manual:
> > they contradict, and I have to look in two documents.
>
> Considering the packaging manual doesn't exist anymore, I don't see how
> anyone could
>>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns writes:
Anthony> On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 06:03:23PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Debian policy should be the minimalistic set of rules that
>> packages follow, and expect other packages to foolow too, in order to
>> have the system be greater than the sum of
On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 06:03:23PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Debian policy should be the minimalistic set of rules that
> packages follow, and expect other packages to foolow too, in order to
> have the system be greater than the sum of the parts. This is what
> allows packages to d
19 matches
Mail list logo
