Hi Russ,
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 11:40:36AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Uwe Kleine-König writes:
>
> > I asked in #debian-mentors about the usage of Replaces: and Conflicts:
> > when a package is split. Cyril suggested to provide an example in the
> > policy for that.
>
> > The patch below is
Ben Finney writes:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
>> index 87b9795..99ab0ff 100644
>> --- a/policy.sgml
>> +++ b/policy.sgml
>> @@ -2398,6 +2398,11 @@ Package: libc6
>>
>>
>>
>> + Each paragraph may contain at most one instance of a particular
Russ Allbery writes:
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 87b9795..99ab0ff 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -2398,6 +2398,11 @@ Package: libc6
>
>
>
> + Each paragraph may contain at most one instance of a particular
> + field name.
> +
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 13:29:42 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Objections or seconds?
>
With the typo fixed, seconded.
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 13:29:42 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> +
>> +Checksums-Sha1 and Checksums-Sha256 are
>> +multiline field. The first line of the field value (the part
> multiline fields
Thanks, fixed.
>> +
>> +In the .dsc fil
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:24:07 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> -Build-Depends-Indep,
>> - Build-Conflicts-Indep
>> +build, build-indep, binary,
>> + and binary-indep
>>
>> -The Build-Depends-Indep and
>> -
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 13:29:42 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 720150d..23a8c90 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -2488,8 +2488,6 @@ Package: libc6
> The syntax and semantics of the fields are described below.
>
>
> -
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 13:01:57 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 720150d..1e134bb 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -5163,11 +5163,20 @@ Replaces: mail-transport-agent
> Development files
>
>
> - The development file
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:24:07 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> - Build-Depends-Indep,
> - Build-Conflicts-Indep
> + build, build-indep, binary,
> + and binary-indep
>
> -The Build-Depends-Indep and
> - Build-Conflicts-Indep
Brian Ryans writes:
> Quoting Russ Allbery on 2010-06-09 13:36:22:
>> The low bar for licenses included in common-licenses by license count
>> is the GFDL, at 875 packages using it in some version. None of the
>> licenses for which we have open bugs reach that package count. The
>> closest is t
Quoting Russ Allbery on 2010-06-09 13:36:22:
> The low bar for licenses included in common-licenses by license count is
> the GFDL, at 875 packages using it in some version. None of the licenses
> for which we have open bugs reach that package count. The closest is the
> MPL version 1.1, at 654 p
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 10:35:22AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes:
> > Andrew McMillan writes:
> >> On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 18:18 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> >>> as a non-native speaker, I have difficulties with the use of 'may' in
> >>> your patch: if fields may be unique, th
On 12/06/10 22:29, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Objections or seconds?
>
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 720150d..23a8c90 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -2488,8 +2488,6 @@ Package: libc6
> The syntax and semantics of the fields are described below.
>
>
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Kurt Roeckx writes:
> dpkg has added new fields in the .dsc and .changes file.
> They both can now contains two new fields:
> Checksums-Sha1
> Checksums-Sha256
> They act the same as Files, but use sha1 and sha256 instead of md5.
Here is proposed wording to document those fields. This change
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
For background here, this bug is about permitting the splitting of the
architecture-independent headers for a library into a separate -headers
package rather than requiring (which the current Policy wording implies)
that they be in the usually architecture-dependent -dev package.
"Kevin B. McCarty
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
"Rémi Perrot" writes:
> In section 12.5 of the policy it like that it is not possible to put
> cgi script in /usr/lib/cgi-lib//
> If this is true, we will have more and more file name conflict, and
> these conflict are quite hard to resolve due to link change across
> the application. These alre
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Charles Fry writes:
> My biggest concern is that Section 7.6 makes it very difficult to
> distinguish between Build-Depends and Build-Depends-Indep.
[...]
> Number 3 would work something like this:
> The dependencies and conflicts they define must be satisfied (as
> defined earlier for
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Guillem Jover writes:
> On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 14:42:46 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Also, if I remember this discussion correctly, Policy currently could
>> be read as saying that a package isn't permitted to remove its obsolete
>> configuration files, so we should at least fix the wording to ma
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Uwe Kleine-König writes:
> I asked in #debian-mentors about the usage of Replaces: and Conflicts:
> when a package is split. Cyril suggested to provide an example in the
> policy for that.
> The patch below isn't tested at all, but should be human parsable to
> understand the suggestion.
Thank
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to '
Russ Allbery writes:
> 2. Apply the patch to Policy included below, which removes this license
>from the list of licenses we tell people to reference from
>/usr/share/common-licenses and explains why.
This patch has now been merged for the next release.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org
Russ Allbery writes:
> Andrew McMillan writes:
>> On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 18:18 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>>> as a non-native speaker, I have difficulties with the use of 'may' in
>>> your patch: if fields may be unique, they also may be not unique, so
>>> what is the message in this sentence?
Andrew McMillan writes:
> On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 18:18 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>> as a non-native speaker, I have difficulties with the use of 'may' in your
>> patch: if fields may be unique, they also may be not unique, so what is the
>> message in this sentence? It does not give me the impr
On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 18:18 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 09:58:28AM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> >
> > diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> > index 87b9795..99ab0ff 100644
> > --- a/policy.sgml
> > +++ b/policy.sgml
> > @@ -2398,6 +2398,11 @@ Package: libc6
> >
On 12/06/10 11:18, Charles Plessy wrote:
> as a non-native speaker, I have difficulties with the use of 'may' in your
> patch: if fields may be unique, they also may be not unique, so what is the
> message in this sentence? It does not give me the impression that the goal
> is to discourage the use
Le Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 09:58:28AM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 87b9795..99ab0ff 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -2398,6 +2398,11 @@ Package: libc6
>
>
>
> + Each paragraph may contain at most one instanc
33 matches
Mail list logo
