Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 09:02:43PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Okay, here's yet another try at the wording for this that tries to
>> exclude Autotools and friends without making the wording too awkward.
>> Word-smithing welcome (as are any other comme
I'd really like to get a new debian-policy package uploaded tomorrow. It
won't be the last one, and we can go back and add more patches and other
fixes later. There are already some major things fixed since the last
release that are widely deployed.
Here's what I think the plan should be:
* Mer
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * #402780: debian-policy HTML "next" loops
> This is either not a bug, or can't be fixed in policy: should
> forward to debiandoc
Agreed.
> * #47438: [PROPOSAL] update policy copyright
> This is too hard to resolve right no
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, here is my classification of policy issues, with the
> unclassified bugs bubbling to the top. Enjoy.
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=debian-policy&[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]&ordering=policy
My classification now mostly mat
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10
usertags 452105 normative proposal
# agreed with the idea but the wording needs a bit of work
tags 452105 - patch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTE
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10
> usertags 452105 normative proposal
Bug#452105: debian-policy: Homepage field in debian/control undocumented
User is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There were no usertags set.
Usertags are now: no
Hi,
While we are all pondering the new policy draft format, the next
step to be taken are looking at current policy, and determining what
are the distinct rules; and what are the normative parts in that rule.
With new additions to policy, determining what constitutes a
rule is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01-12-2007 19:53, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 04:52:16PM -0200, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw)
> wrote:
>> Considering the chance of rewriting the document and using
>> UTF-8, can you consider the idea to add support for tran
On Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 04:52:16PM -0200, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw)
wrote:
> Considering the chance of rewriting the document and using
> UTF-8, can you consider the idea to add support for translations in
> the build process and repository layout while doing the rewriting?
Debian po
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01-12-2007 02:51, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
[...]
> * #175064: Debian policy documents should be UTF-8 encoded
> Whoof. Well, we can make sure that the source files are in
> UTF-8; and that we set ALNG=C in front of the debiandoc2X
>
10 matches
Mail list logo