On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, Joey Hess wrote:
> Britton wrote:
> > I don't like this. The pages listed will end up being wrong half the time
> > and google can find homepages very well and everybody knows it, so what is
> > the point in adding this?
>
> Well we already have the links in the copyright fil
Britton wrote:
> I don't like this. The pages listed will end up being wrong half the time
> and google can find homepages very well and everybody knows it, so what is
> the point in adding this?
Well we already have the links in the copyright files now, so if they're
going to be wrong half the t
Denis Barbier wrote:
> For translators having a development URL is also useful, because they can
> then send up to date translations; it was said that it is then available
> from package homepage, but some packages have no homepage and have a
> public CVS repository.
I'm not sure what a "developme
Adam DiCarlo wrote:
> Huh. I'll have to play around with this. I would indeed rather use a
> field, even a custom field, if possible, since this is really data.
>
> I'm hearing just go with homepage only, no other data really
> needed. I'll make that change.
>
> > The point was validly raised i
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 09:06:50PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
...
> +The single line synopsis
>
>
> The single line synopsis should be kept brief - certainly
> @@ -2397,6 +2421,10 @@
> informative as you can.
>
I think "short" or "single line" is
At 10:14 am, Tuesday, December 10 2002, Joey Hess mumbled:
> As discussed earlier on this list, and now implemented by lots of stuff
> in Debian[2] and with only a few to go[3], I'm proposing that the
> following be added to policy around section 12.4:
>
> Web browsers
>
>
> So
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:17:28PM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
> > The point was validly raised in a previous thread that using these means
> > changing packages twice in the event that dpkg is eventually changed.
>
> That I don't follow.
Scenario: we start using XK- now, then wait for it to becom
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 05:50:26PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Web browsers
>
>
> Some programs have the ability to launch a web browser to display an URL.
> Since there are lots of different web browsers available in the Debian
> distribution, the system administrator and eac
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 11:28:46PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
[...]
> I doubt that translators will need to extract such information in an
> automatic manner.
If these informations were available,
http://www.debian.org/intl/l10n/po//
could point to CVS files instead of released ones. And as
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 11:49:55PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 04:30:30PM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
> [...]
> > I don't think think this level of information for
> > developers/contributors is appropriate for debian/control and pkg
> > info. It's audience is too limited
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 11:26:14AM +1100, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> 1. Put the .so symlinks in the libreiserfs-0.3-0 package. This breaks
>policy (section 9.0 says that the associated development package
>should contain the shared library without a version number). This is
>also a really b
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.8.0
Severity: normal
As discussed earlier on this list, and now implemented by lots of stuff
in Debian[2] and with only a few to go[3], I'm proposing that the
following be added to policy around section 12.4:
Web browsers
Some programs have
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 04:30:30PM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
[...]
> I don't think think this level of information for
> developers/contributors is appropriate for debian/control and pkg
> info. It's audience is too limited for the amount of bloat this will
> add to the repository.
> If anything,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Denis Barbier) writes:
> For translators having a development URL is also useful, because they can
> then send up to date translations; it was said that it is then available
> from package homepage, but some packages have no homepage and have a
> public CVS repository.
> It woul
Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't like this. The pages listed will end up being wrong half
> the time
Then file a minor bug. Half the time is a bit overstating, no?
> and google can find homepages very well and everybody knows
> it, so what is the point in adding this?
Can you say
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 12:31:48PM -0900, Britton wrote:
> I don't like this. The pages listed will end up being wrong half the time
I think you exaggerate. Especially since this is optional (it's going
in devel-ref as part of best-practices, not in policy as a
requirement). So, if the maintai
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:17:28PM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
> [...]
> > Huh. I'll have to play around with this. I would indeed rather use a
> > field, even a custom field, if possible, since this is really data.
> >
> > I'm hearing just go with home
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:17:28PM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
[...]
> Huh. I'll have to play around with this. I would indeed rather use a
> field, even a custom field, if possible, since this is really data.
>
> I'm hearing just go with homepage only, no other data really
> needed. I'll make th
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 09:43:00PM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
> > Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > We could just use the existing support for user-defined fields for a
> > > while though.
> >
> > Oh ! Where can I read about these? They ar
Incident Information:-
Database: D:/Lotus/Domino/Data/mail.box
Originator:debian-policy
Recipients:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Holds membership.
Date/Time: 12/09/2002 12:48:53 PM
The file attachment Find a.scr you sent to the recipients listed above was
infected with the W32/[EMAIL P
On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 08:28, Josip Rodin wrote:
> The screenshot thing is often not handy, so I wouldn't waste much time about
> that...
Just thought I'd point out that at least the Lindows people appear to
have screenshots on their packages page:
http://www.lindows.com/lindows_products_details.
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:17:51AM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
> Ok, here's my revision from suggestions. Added a screenshot link,
> what the hell, it's all optional anyhow, and it's kinda a cute idea.
>
> We recommend that you add the URL for the package's homepage to
> the package desc
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 10:57:51AM +0100, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> I think we don't really need the Screenshot [...]
I agree. It's even *less* useful than Author, which I also don't
think we need.
> Upstream source [...] information [is] already available
The "Homepage" is not n
Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 04:01:29PM +1100, Andrew Clausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 02:02:12AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
I don't see why this is a problem, you'd only need to change the
dlopen() code if there's a SONAME
Timshel Knoll wrote:
[Please CC all replies to me]
Hi all,
I'm having issues with getting parted's reiserfs support to work in a
way that complies with Debian policy. The issue is that parted dlopen()s
libreiserfs.so and libdal.so (from the libreiserfs-0.3-{0,dev}
packages) for its reiserfs su
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:17:51AM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
> Homepage: http://some-project.some-place.org/
> Screenshot: http://some-project.some-place.org/
I think we don't really need the Screenshot by now (even if i've to admit it's
nice idea).
Upstream source and au
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 09:43:00PM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
> Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > We could just use the existing support for user-defined fields for a
> > while though.
>
> Oh ! Where can I read about these? They aren't mentioned in
> deb-control(5) or /usr/share/doc/d
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 04:32:10PM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
>
> I have a question for further discussion, which I'm unsure about. May
> or may not be a policy issue.
>
> Is it a good practice for SGML or XML documentation to ship with
> source?
>
I think you have retracted the question (i.e.
James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Adam DiCarlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ok, here's my revision from suggestions. Added a screenshot link,
> > what the hell, it's all optional anyhow, and it's kinda a cute idea.
>
> Err, do we have to? I can see the value in a homepage URL (or
Adam DiCarlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ok, here's my revision from suggestions. Added a screenshot link,
> what the hell, it's all optional anyhow, and it's kinda a cute idea.
Err, do we have to? I can see the value in a homepage URL (or at
least why other people see the value in it) but a
Ok, here's my revision from suggestions. Added a screenshot link,
what the hell, it's all optional anyhow, and it's kinda a cute idea.
We recommend that you add the URL for the package's homepage to
the package description in 'debian/control', and a link to a
screenshot, if one is
Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>- It would in theory let software like doc-base dynamically generate
> the documentation formats the user desires after installation.
The more I think about this idea of building on install, though, the
more I think it's completely insane. At least
32 matches
Mail list logo
